Howdy, Stranger!

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

The rail strike – the vast majority aren’t affected – politicalbetting.com

2

Comments

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    Foxy said:

    Anyway, back on topic I'm not that surprised that Labour's strikes haven't been roundly condemned and Starmer with them. The "greedy union barons" trope is less effective when so many workers will be looking at their own position thinking the pay request sounds perfectly reasonable.

    Not a few workers are thinking "If the Rail workers get screwed, we are next, if the Rail workers get 7% then we are more likely to get that too"
    5% across the board in the public sector is doable tomorrow. That would then become the benchmark.
    And it isn't inflationary. Because it's below the inflation rate.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    This is the key point that keeps being missed. When they say they are striking to protect jobs, ask what the jobs are. The government have directed Network Rail to make massive cuts to maintenance and inspections. Which will literally leave people dead. Again.
    If you don't think the rails are safe, why would you ride them? Plenty of alternatives are available, unless you're talking nonsense.

    If there are accidents then Network Rail will be accountable, but if the unions want to start managing the safety record they should quit the union and join management. Or maybe they're just Luddites trying to preserve their own jobs and feather their beds.

    But OGH is right. If the media weren't obsessing about it, I'd have no reason to know the rail strikes were even happening. Doesn't affect me an iota.
    Of course, one of the biggest rail safety problems is people who choose to drive.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32F3bXlDZuU
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,758
    edited June 2022

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    This is the key point that keeps being missed. When they say they are striking to protect jobs, ask what the jobs are. The government have directed Network Rail to make massive cuts to maintenance and inspections. Which will literally leave people dead. Again.
    If you don't think the rails are safe, why would you ride them? Plenty of alternatives are available, unless you're talking nonsense.

    If there are accidents then Network Rail will be accountable, but if the unions want to start managing the safety record they should quit the union and join management. Or maybe they're just Luddites trying to preserve their own jobs and feather their beds.
    They are of course considerably safer than roads.

    David St John Thomas once suggested that had rural railways been less heavily regulated, less safe - and therefore cheaper to run - they might have survived and thousands of lives every year would have been saved.

    Which I suppose is the paradox we're addressing now.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,870

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    "You simply don't make things less safe".

    Railtrack did. For profit. And I do know (far too much) stuff about the railways. There absolutely are track recording equipment that can scan rails on the go. Network Rail has several such trains - but they act to supplement the visual inspections that remain critical.

    Last time we went down the "just cut the cost" route we ended up with people dead. Repeatedly. They simply did not know the condition of track and signalling equipment. So had to do emergency inspections and blanket speed restrictions until they could check and then repair everything. So we know where cutting the maintenance regime leads. This proposal has them double routine maintenance periods. To save money. They aren't even proposing to replace mk1 eyeballs with the inspection train on the same basis. Its half the maintenance the network needs now.

    Which will get people killed. Because you really do make things less safe when wazzocks without a clue about engineering make decisions for political and economic reasons.
    You would think that Grant Shapps, being the MP for Hatfield, would be particularly aware of the effects of reducing rail safety standards and using unsuitable subcontractors.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    This is the key point that keeps being missed. When they say they are striking to protect jobs, ask what the jobs are. The government have directed Network Rail to make massive cuts to maintenance and inspections. Which will literally leave people dead. Again.
    If you don't think the rails are safe, why would you ride them? Plenty of alternatives are available, unless you're talking nonsense.

    If there are accidents then Network Rail will be accountable, but if the unions want to start managing the safety record they should quit the union and join management. Or maybe they're just Luddites trying to preserve their own jobs and feather their beds.

    But OGH is right. If the media weren't obsessing about it, I'd have no reason to know the rail strikes were even happening. Doesn't affect me an iota.
    Huh? People tend not to know what is safe and what is not. Whenever we get a rail disaster there are vox pops and people say "not safe, I'll drive". And yet the safety records of driving your own car vs being a passenger on a train make it statistically far more likely to be hurt whilst driving.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,758

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    Gut feeling is that the automated trains are great for quickly ultrasonically scanning for things like incipioent fatigue cracking in railhead corners and checking for undue deflection under load of the track (as might be caused by a pumping sleeper without enough compacted ballast under it) but you do still need a visual inspection of the track and the area around it for anything that a robot wouldn't spot. We've had both for a long time now.
    I actually did weekly track inspections for a preserved railway; two of us walking two or three miles on a Saturday morning. One on one side of the track; the other on the other, looking for things like loose keys, dropped joints for note. Or where some idiots had put something on the line whilst it had been out of service during the week (never happened to me, but happened to someone else). Good fun, and a good opportunity for a natter with friends as we did it.

    Also, we would note things like trees growing too close to the line, and where there was too much undergrowth that would need to be burnt back later in a controlled manner. And a host of other things that would need fettling.

    That was old joined sixty foot 95-pound per yard bullhead rails, on timber and concrete sleepers. Most Network Rail lines have much more modern track systems - heavier flat-bottomed rail, continuously welded on concrete (or sometimes steel) sleepers.

    The stuff the NMT trains can recognise are quite amazing: and it should be noted that visual inspections often fail to detect problems as well. Whether track inspections are still needed, or at the same regularity, very much depends on the details. According to (1) from ten years ago: "Traditional inspection of rail condition consumes 1.3 million man hours of work each year." The NMT will remove 520,000 hours of this.

    Without the details, IMV it's impossible to say whether reducing the amount of manual inspections would impact safety.

    (1): https://www.railengineer.co.uk/track-inspection-at-125mph/
    The truly alarming bit isn't that they want to cut visual inspections in favour of more NMT inspections. It is that they propose to double the length of time between inspections AND cut visual inspections.
    Again, source please. I don't think that was in the article you linked to.
    Frankly DYOR. The industry press has been talking about this for months. The minister said they want to cut these roles completely. NR have said they want to "modernise". And having put their plan to the union no agreement has been reached.

    As always the exact numbers are open to negotiation. But the only person seemingly denying the plan is you. And the rationale? Budget cuts - as NR says in the article I linked to. We don't preserve jobs made redundant with new technology - that is stupid. But that isn't this. And we have very live examples from recent history as to why this is a bad idea.
    I also read some of the industry press, which would be of absolutely no surprise to anyone on PB. ;) I must read very different ones to you, though,

    I am not 'denying' the plan. I am asking *you* what *you* are basing your claims on, because they sniff wrong to me. That's not to say you're not right; it's just that they smell wrong. And so far you haven't been able to back them up.

    Railway unions have a long and sad history of using overwrought safety claims to preserve jobs: from the secondman nonsense to their opposition to Driver-Only Operation. At times they are correct to do so; at others (as with the two mentioned), they're ridiculous.

    Can I believe that removing manual inspections might impact safety? Yes. Can I believe they might not impact safety? Yes. The devil will be in the details.
    Fine. Lets meet in the middle. Transport ministers think
    I stopped reading at that point, false premise.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    Foxy said:

    Anyway, back on topic I'm not that surprised that Labour's strikes haven't been roundly condemned and Starmer with them. The "greedy union barons" trope is less effective when so many workers will be looking at their own position thinking the pay request sounds perfectly reasonable.

    Not a few workers are thinking "If the Rail workers get screwed, we are next, if the Rail workers get 7% then we are more likely to get that too"
    I’m not expecting much of a pay rise at the uni, unless the student fees rise.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    Off topic. But the football season 2022-3 started tonight.
    Champions League.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,149
    edited June 2022

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    "You simply don't make things less safe".

    Railtrack did. For profit. And I do know (far too much) stuff about the railways. There absolutely are track recording equipment that can scan rails on the go. Network Rail has several such trains - but they act to supplement the visual inspections that remain critical.

    Last time we went down the "just cut the cost" route we ended up with people dead. Repeatedly. They simply did not know the condition of track and signalling equipment. So had to do emergency inspections and blanket speed restrictions until they could check and then repair everything. So we know where cutting the maintenance regime leads. This proposal has them double routine maintenance periods. To save money. They aren't even proposing to replace mk1 eyeballs with the inspection train on the same basis. Its half the maintenance the network needs now.

    Which will get people killed. Because you really do make things less safe when wazzocks without a clue about engineering make decisions for political and economic reasons.
    You would think that Grant Shapps, being the MP for Hatfield, would be particularly aware of the effects of reducing rail safety standards and using unsuitable subcontractors.
    Notd to mention Welwyn - itself a major disaster which forced serious changes in practice. He was MP for Welwyn Hatfield from 2005. Though the Hatfield crash was 2000 and Welwyn in 1935 (well, there were more, but that was the significant one). So he might not have connected the dots.
  • Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    This is the key point that keeps being missed. When they say they are striking to protect jobs, ask what the jobs are. The government have directed Network Rail to make massive cuts to maintenance and inspections. Which will literally leave people dead. Again.
    If you don't think the rails are safe, why would you ride them? Plenty of alternatives are available, unless you're talking nonsense.

    If there are accidents then Network Rail will be accountable, but if the unions want to start managing the safety record they should quit the union and join management. Or maybe they're just Luddites trying to preserve their own jobs and feather their beds.

    But OGH is right. If the media weren't obsessing about it, I'd have no reason to know the rail strikes were even happening. Doesn't affect me an iota.
    Huh? People tend not to know what is safe and what is not. Whenever we get a rail disaster there are vox pops and people say "not safe, I'll drive". And yet the safety records of driving your own car vs being a passenger on a train make it statistically far more likely to be hurt whilst driving.
    Precisely, so why not quit moaning and get the reforms done then?
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,911

    Anyway, back on topic I'm not that surprised that Labour's strikes haven't been roundly condemned and Starmer with them. The "greedy union barons" trope is less effective when so many workers will be looking at their own position thinking the pay request sounds perfectly reasonable.

    Indeed. Most of my private sector, managerial class friends are getting pay rises at or close to inflation, or, if they're not, they're quitting their jobs and moving to a different company for an extra 10%.

    Hiring freezes are starting to come in at a couple of place I know of, mind you. But it is still very much a job seekers market.

    When inflation is running at double digits, people are going to use whatever leverage they can to increase their salary.

    I don't see the problem with that. It's individuals acting in their own best economic interests.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    edited June 2022
    Did my bit for local politics this evening by going along to the town hall "save the only bus to Glasgow" community meeting. Absolutely rammed. Surprised just how many turned out to voice their feelings about it.

    The bus company suggestion for the alternative route is basically to take the train, if you can get another bus to the nearest train station. And if it's running, presumably...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    dixiedean said:

    Off topic. But the football season 2022-3 started tonight.
    Champions League.

    Vikinggur Reykjavik currently winning 4:1. Could go all the way...
  • The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    edited June 2022

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    Gut feeling is that the automated trains are great for quickly ultrasonically scanning for things like incipioent fatigue cracking in railhead corners and checking for undue deflection under load of the track (as might be caused by a pumping sleeper without enough compacted ballast under it) but you do still need a visual inspection of the track and the area around it for anything that a robot wouldn't spot. We've had both for a long time now.
    I actually did weekly track inspections for a preserved railway; two of us walking two or three miles on a Saturday morning. One on one side of the track; the other on the other, looking for things like loose keys, dropped joints for note. Or where some idiots had put something on the line whilst it had been out of service during the week (never happened to me, but happened to someone else). Good fun, and a good opportunity for a natter with friends as we did it.

    Also, we would note things like trees growing too close to the line, and where there was too much undergrowth that would need to be burnt back later in a controlled manner. And a host of other things that would need fettling.

    That was old joined sixty foot 95-pound per yard bullhead rails, on timber and concrete sleepers. Most Network Rail lines have much more modern track systems - heavier flat-bottomed rail, continuously welded on concrete (or sometimes steel) sleepers.

    The stuff the NMT trains can recognise are quite amazing: and it should be noted that visual inspections often fail to detect problems as well. Whether track inspections are still needed, or at the same regularity, very much depends on the details. According to (1) from ten years ago: "Traditional inspection of rail condition consumes 1.3 million man hours of work each year." The NMT will remove 520,000 hours of this.

    Without the details, IMV it's impossible to say whether reducing the amount of manual inspections would impact safety.

    (1): https://www.railengineer.co.uk/track-inspection-at-125mph/
    The truly alarming bit isn't that they want to cut visual inspections in favour of more NMT inspections. It is that they propose to double the length of time between inspections AND cut visual inspections.
    Again, source please. I don't think that was in the article you linked to.
    Frankly DYOR. The industry press has been talking about this for months. The minister said they want to cut these roles completely. NR have said they want to "modernise". And having put their plan to the union no agreement has been reached.

    As always the exact numbers are open to negotiation. But the only person seemingly denying the plan is you. And the rationale? Budget cuts - as NR says in the article I linked to. We don't preserve jobs made redundant with new technology - that is stupid. But that isn't this. And we have very live examples from recent history as to why this is a bad idea.
    I also read some of the industry press, which would be of absolutely no surprise to anyone on PB. ;) I must read very different ones to you, though,

    I am not 'denying' the plan. I am asking *you* what *you* are basing your claims on, because they sniff wrong to me. That's not to say you're not right; it's just that they smell wrong. And so far you haven't been able to back them up.

    Railway unions have a long and sad history of using overwrought safety claims to preserve jobs: from the secondman nonsense to their opposition to Driver-Only Operation. At times they are correct to do so; at others (as with the two mentioned), they're ridiculous.

    Can I believe that removing manual inspections might impact safety? Yes. Can I believe they might not impact safety? Yes. The devil will be in the details.
    Fine. Lets meet in the middle. Transport ministers think they have "digital" solutions to analogue problems. Grayling said that instead of spending on engineering to fix the Castlefield Corridor issue a cheaper "digital railway" solution would fix it. No such thing. And now we have jobby on Channel 4 News saying digital inspections will be more modern than eyeballs and thus fix the budget problem.

    Why this is bad is that the DfT directly mandate all the spending of all the elements they control - Network Rail, "nationalised" franchises and management contract franchises. So impossible ideas get proposed as real solutions and when they turn out to be fantasy the request is "so do something else then".

    Does Shapps want to create another Grayrigg or Hatfield? No. Not deliberately. But are they both ignorant and zealous enough to force the changes to the industry that allow them to happen? Absolutely. As you say, the devil is in the details. And we know from their public utterances - like on last night's C4 News - that the people making the decisions are clueless about reality...
    They will create a new Grayrigg / Hatfield - it goes without saying based on the cuts they wish to impose.

    What the unions are doing is making sure that Shapps is aware of the situation so that when it occurs he is the one stood in court answering a corporate manslaughter charge..
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    Nope the big fear is that the planned cost savings on inspections go ahead and some poor union member is stood in court answering for why the track cracked as the train went over it.

    The issue is that Shapps wants to cut more money than can be cut in the short term while wasting £50m+ relocating Network Rail on the results of a utterly irrational public vote.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,749

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    Isn’t that then also a big danger for the FLSOJ when no one gives a fuck about his confected Thatcher Union Basher act?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    Gut feeling is that the automated trains are great for quickly ultrasonically scanning for things like incipioent fatigue cracking in railhead corners and checking for undue deflection under load of the track (as might be caused by a pumping sleeper without enough compacted ballast under it) but you do still need a visual inspection of the track and the area around it for anything that a robot wouldn't spot. We've had both for a long time now.
    I actually did weekly track inspections for a preserved railway; two of us walking two or three miles on a Saturday morning. One on one side of the track; the other on the other, looking for things like loose keys, dropped joints for note. Or where some idiots had put something on the line whilst it had been out of service during the week (never happened to me, but happened to someone else). Good fun, and a good opportunity for a natter with friends as we did it.

    Also, we would note things like trees growing too close to the line, and where there was too much undergrowth that would need to be burnt back later in a controlled manner. And a host of other things that would need fettling.

    That was old joined sixty foot 95-pound per yard bullhead rails, on timber and concrete sleepers. Most Network Rail lines have much more modern track systems - heavier flat-bottomed rail, continuously welded on concrete (or sometimes steel) sleepers.

    The stuff the NMT trains can recognise are quite amazing: and it should be noted that visual inspections often fail to detect problems as well. Whether track inspections are still needed, or at the same regularity, very much depends on the details. According to (1) from ten years ago: "Traditional inspection of rail condition consumes 1.3 million man hours of work each year." The NMT will remove 520,000 hours of this.

    Without the details, IMV it's impossible to say whether reducing the amount of manual inspections would impact safety.

    (1): https://www.railengineer.co.uk/track-inspection-at-125mph/
    The truly alarming bit isn't that they want to cut visual inspections in favour of more NMT inspections. It is that they propose to double the length of time between inspections AND cut visual inspections.
    Again, source please. I don't think that was in the article you linked to.
    Frankly DYOR. The industry press has been talking about this for months. The minister said they want to cut these roles completely. NR have said they want to "modernise". And having put their plan to the union no agreement has been reached.

    As always the exact numbers are open to negotiation. But the only person seemingly denying the plan is you. And the rationale? Budget cuts - as NR says in the article I linked to. We don't preserve jobs made redundant with new technology - that is stupid. But that isn't this. And we have very live examples from recent history as to why this is a bad idea.
    I also read some of the industry press, which would be of absolutely no surprise to anyone on PB. ;) I must read very different ones to you, though,

    I am not 'denying' the plan. I am asking *you* what *you* are basing your claims on, because they sniff wrong to me. That's not to say you're not right; it's just that they smell wrong. And so far you haven't been able to back them up.

    Railway unions have a long and sad history of using overwrought safety claims to preserve jobs: from the secondman nonsense to their opposition to Driver-Only Operation. At times they are correct to do so; at others (as with the two mentioned), they're ridiculous.

    Can I believe that removing manual inspections might impact safety? Yes. Can I believe they might not impact safety? Yes. The devil will be in the details.
    Fine. Lets meet in the middle. Transport ministers think they have "digital" solutions to analogue problems. Grayling said that instead of spending on engineering to fix the Castlefield Corridor issue a cheaper "digital railway" solution would fix it. No such thing. And now we have jobby on Channel 4 News saying digital inspections will be more modern than eyeballs and thus fix the budget problem.

    Why this is bad is that the DfT directly mandate all the spending of all the elements they control - Network Rail, "nationalised" franchises and management contract franchises. So impossible ideas get proposed as real solutions and when they turn out to be fantasy the request is "so do something else then".

    Does Shapps want to create another Grayrigg or Hatfield? No. Not deliberately. But are they both ignorant and zealous enough to force the changes to the industry that allow them to happen? Absolutely. As you say, the devil is in the details. And we know from their public utterances - like on last night's C4 News - that the people making the decisions are clueless about reality...
    They will create a new Grayrigg / Hatfield - it goes without saying based on the cuts they wish to impose.

    What the unions are doing is making sure that Shapps is aware of the situation so that when it occurs he is the one stood in court answering a corporate manslaughter charge..
    The same sort of thing was said about getting rid of secondmen. Or Driver-Only Operation.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    I see - the new line is not to call them "Union barons" but to shrug the shoulders and try to make it irrelevant.

    From the Government which was pleading with us all to return to offices, now, it's a "work from home and enjoy the sunshine".

    There are still plenty who are claiming it will cost them - notably companies with city centre operations - but apparently they don't count.

    The RMT is to be broken by apathy and indifference - it would seem.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 2,722
    edited June 2022
    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    "You simply don't make things less safe".

    Railtrack did. For profit. And I do know (far too much) stuff about the railways. There absolutely are track recording equipment that can scan rails on the go. Network Rail has several such trains - but they act to supplement the visual inspections that remain critical.

    Last time we went down the "just cut the cost" route we ended up with people dead. Repeatedly. They simply did not know the condition of track and signalling equipment. So had to do emergency inspections and blanket speed restrictions until they could check and then repair everything. So we know where cutting the maintenance regime leads. This proposal has them double routine maintenance periods. To save money. They aren't even proposing to replace mk1 eyeballs with the inspection train on the same basis. Its half the maintenance the network needs now.

    Which will get people killed. Because you really do make things less safe when wazzocks without a clue about engineering make decisions for political and economic reasons.
    I take it back, you do know. Cheers for the info. I’ll qualify the statement - you shouldn’t make things less safe...
    Appreciated. @Carnyx gave the Grayrigg example. You can't rely on the inspection train. And yet the minister went on Channel 4 News last night and said that you don't need old-fashioned practices like people walking the tracks when you can have digital inspections on a train. He has *no clue* what the inspection train can and cannot do or even what needs to be inspected. But "digital" has been the solution to all the railway budget problems for a few years.

    No, you can't. This is the problem. The DfT are directing both Network Rail and the rail operators what to do. DfT wazzocks don't have the first clue what they are talking about. Ministers definitely don't. But they are directing NR and saying "cut the staff, save the money".

    People will die. Again.
    The DfT, DfE and DoH...any more departments that are more useless than a bull's udder?
    Currently inspections are done both manually and by inspection trains.

    I've just asked on a railway discord server and there are, seemingly, no plans to increase the number of inspection trains, so what is going to perform the tasks currently done manually?
  • TresTres Posts: 2,163

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,401
    I would just like to point out that Dr Sunil's yellow penning of the rail network is at "Baker Level", while the real hard-core Gricers do it at "Quail Level".

    While for the former, simply travelling on the line from A to B is sufficient, for the latter they need to travel over every single bit of track - every crossover, every loop, every siding, every platform at every station. Railtour operators are able to fill trains with these Quailiacs by offering them the chance to travel into a freight yard or through the carriage washers at a depot.

    Note: Baker and Quail are two rail atlases that provide different levels of detail.

    Oh, and I just thought of the term Qualiac.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Interesting meeting:

    @trussliz
    Met @NikkiHaley to talk about the importance of ensuring Putin loses in Ukraine and standing up to aggressors and authoritarians around the world in defence of freedom and liberty 🇬🇧 🇺🇸


    https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1539350330801983488
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited June 2022

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Most who work in financial services still vote Tory and they tend to live in the Home Counties, they are not Islington based left liberals who work in the top ranks of the public sector, public law or the media and arts
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 18,156
    edited June 2022

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
  • Ally_B1Ally_B1 Posts: 46

    I would just like to point out that Dr Sunil's yellow penning of the rail network is at "Baker Level", while the real hard-core Gricers do it at "Quail Level".

    While for the former, simply travelling on the line from A to B is sufficient, for the latter they need to travel over every single bit of track - every crossover, every loop, every siding, every platform at every station. Railtour operators are able to fill trains with these Quailiacs by offering them the chance to travel into a freight yard or through the carriage washers at a depot.

    Note: Baker and Quail are two rail atlases that provide different levels of detail.

    Oh, and I just thought of the term Qualiac.

    Baker is for the sane, Quail is for the insane.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    Gut feeling is that the automated trains are great for quickly ultrasonically scanning for things like incipioent fatigue cracking in railhead corners and checking for undue deflection under load of the track (as might be caused by a pumping sleeper without enough compacted ballast under it) but you do still need a visual inspection of the track and the area around it for anything that a robot wouldn't spot. We've had both for a long time now.
    I actually did weekly track inspections for a preserved railway; two of us walking two or three miles on a Saturday morning. One on one side of the track; the other on the other, looking for things like loose keys, dropped joints for note. Or where some idiots had put something on the line whilst it had been out of service during the week (never happened to me, but happened to someone else). Good fun, and a good opportunity for a natter with friends as we did it.

    Also, we would note things like trees growing too close to the line, and where there was too much undergrowth that would need to be burnt back later in a controlled manner. And a host of other things that would need fettling.

    That was old joined sixty foot 95-pound per yard bullhead rails, on timber and concrete sleepers. Most Network Rail lines have much more modern track systems - heavier flat-bottomed rail, continuously welded on concrete (or sometimes steel) sleepers.

    The stuff the NMT trains can recognise are quite amazing: and it should be noted that visual inspections often fail to detect problems as well. Whether track inspections are still needed, or at the same regularity, very much depends on the details. According to (1) from ten years ago: "Traditional inspection of rail condition consumes 1.3 million man hours of work each year." The NMT will remove 520,000 hours of this.

    Without the details, IMV it's impossible to say whether reducing the amount of manual inspections would impact safety.

    (1): https://www.railengineer.co.uk/track-inspection-at-125mph/
    The truly alarming bit isn't that they want to cut visual inspections in favour of more NMT inspections. It is that they propose to double the length of time between inspections AND cut visual inspections.
    Again, source please. I don't think that was in the article you linked to.
    Frankly DYOR. The industry press has been talking about this for months. The minister said they want to cut these roles completely. NR have said they want to "modernise". And having put their plan to the union no agreement has been reached.

    As always the exact numbers are open to negotiation. But the only person seemingly denying the plan is you. And the rationale? Budget cuts - as NR says in the article I linked to. We don't preserve jobs made redundant with new technology - that is stupid. But that isn't this. And we have very live examples from recent history as to why this is a bad idea.
    I also read some of the industry press, which would be of absolutely no surprise to anyone on PB. ;) I must read very different ones to you, though,

    I am not 'denying' the plan. I am asking *you* what *you* are basing your claims on, because they sniff wrong to me. That's not to say you're not right; it's just that they smell wrong. And so far you haven't been able to back them up.

    Railway unions have a long and sad history of using overwrought safety claims to preserve jobs: from the secondman nonsense to their opposition to Driver-Only Operation. At times they are correct to do so; at others (as with the two mentioned), they're ridiculous.

    Can I believe that removing manual inspections might impact safety? Yes. Can I believe they might not impact safety? Yes. The devil will be in the details.
    Fine. Lets meet in the middle. Transport ministers think they have "digital" solutions to analogue problems. Grayling said that instead of spending on engineering to fix the Castlefield Corridor issue a cheaper "digital railway" solution would fix it. No such thing. And now we have jobby on Channel 4 News saying digital inspections will be more modern than eyeballs and thus fix the budget problem.

    Why this is bad is that the DfT directly mandate all the spending of all the elements they control - Network Rail, "nationalised" franchises and management contract franchises. So impossible ideas get proposed as real solutions and when they turn out to be fantasy the request is "so do something else then".

    Does Shapps want to create another Grayrigg or Hatfield? No. Not deliberately. But are they both ignorant and zealous enough to force the changes to the industry that allow them to happen? Absolutely. As you say, the devil is in the details. And we know from their public utterances - like on last night's C4 News - that the people making the decisions are clueless about reality...
    They will create a new Grayrigg / Hatfield - it goes without saying based on the cuts they wish to impose.

    What the unions are doing is making sure that Shapps is aware of the situation so that when it occurs he is the one stood in court answering a corporate manslaughter charge..
    The same sort of thing was said about getting rid of secondmen. Or Driver-Only Operation.
    See my post below this one. Currently you have fully utilised inspection trains and manual inspections.

    Manual inspections are going but no new trains have been built - so what is going to replace the manual inspections...

    I'm happy to hear your long term and short term solutions.....

    Note - I'm not particularly bothered about ticket offices closing - now tickets are electronic that isn't a problem. However it would be a problem, if, (say) you don't have a mobile phone or computer and printer...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    I loved his demolition of Kay Burley, posted on twitter by the hapless Burley herself earlier.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    "You simply don't make things less safe".

    Railtrack did. For profit. And I do know (far too much) stuff about the railways. There absolutely are track recording equipment that can scan rails on the go. Network Rail has several such trains - but they act to supplement the visual inspections that remain critical.

    Last time we went down the "just cut the cost" route we ended up with people dead. Repeatedly. They simply did not know the condition of track and signalling equipment. So had to do emergency inspections and blanket speed restrictions until they could check and then repair everything. So we know where cutting the maintenance regime leads. This proposal has them double routine maintenance periods. To save money. They aren't even proposing to replace mk1 eyeballs with the inspection train on the same basis. Its half the maintenance the network needs now.

    Which will get people killed. Because you really do make things less safe when wazzocks without a clue about engineering make decisions for political and economic reasons.
    I take it back, you do know. Cheers for the info. I’ll qualify the statement - you shouldn’t make things less safe...
    Appreciated. @Carnyx gave the Grayrigg example. You can't rely on the inspection train. And yet the minister went on Channel 4 News last night and said that you don't need old-fashioned practices like people walking the tracks when you can have digital inspections on a train. He has *no clue* what the inspection train can and cannot do or even what needs to be inspected. But "digital" has been the solution to all the railway budget problems for a few years.

    No, you can't. This is the problem. The DfT are directing both Network Rail and the rail operators what to do. DfT wazzocks don't have the first clue what they are talking about. Ministers definitely don't. But they are directing NR and saying "cut the staff, save the money".

    People will die. Again.
    The DfT, DfE and DoH...any more departments that are more useless than a bull's udder?
    Currently inspections are done both manually and by inspection trains.

    I've just asked on a railway discord server and there are, seemingly, no plans to increase the number of inspection trains, so what is going to perform the tasks currently done manually?
    Accidents?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,758
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    "You simply don't make things less safe".

    Railtrack did. For profit. And I do know (far too much) stuff about the railways. There absolutely are track recording equipment that can scan rails on the go. Network Rail has several such trains - but they act to supplement the visual inspections that remain critical.

    Last time we went down the "just cut the cost" route we ended up with people dead. Repeatedly. They simply did not know the condition of track and signalling equipment. So had to do emergency inspections and blanket speed restrictions until they could check and then repair everything. So we know where cutting the maintenance regime leads. This proposal has them double routine maintenance periods. To save money. They aren't even proposing to replace mk1 eyeballs with the inspection train on the same basis. Its half the maintenance the network needs now.

    Which will get people killed. Because you really do make things less safe when wazzocks without a clue about engineering make decisions for political and economic reasons.
    I take it back, you do know. Cheers for the info. I’ll qualify the statement - you shouldn’t make things less safe...
    Appreciated. @Carnyx gave the Grayrigg example. You can't rely on the inspection train. And yet the minister went on Channel 4 News last night and said that you don't need old-fashioned practices like people walking the tracks when you can have digital inspections on a train. He has *no clue* what the inspection train can and cannot do or even what needs to be inspected. But "digital" has been the solution to all the railway budget problems for a few years.

    No, you can't. This is the problem. The DfT are directing both Network Rail and the rail operators what to do. DfT wazzocks don't have the first clue what they are talking about. Ministers definitely don't. But they are directing NR and saying "cut the staff, save the money".

    People will die. Again.
    The DfT, DfE and DoH...any more departments that are more useless than a bull's udder?
    Currently inspections are done both manually and by inspection trains.

    I've just asked on a railway discord server and there are, seemingly, no plans to increase the number of inspection trains, so what is going to perform the tasks currently done manually?
    Job lot of pixies.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,226
    Trains!
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
    Do you mind - round here we are Parmo or pie eating inbreds.... None of that foreign (cornish) pasty muck round here.... They are for southern softies.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Still higher than the 19% the Conservatives got in Wales in 1997, the 21% they got in 2001 and 2005 and matching the 26% Cameron got in Wales in 2010
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623


    Oh, and I just thought of the term Qualiac.

    Portmanteau of "qualified maniac"?
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    (Snip)
    Hold on, can I have a source for that claim please?
    Widely reported by newspapers that don't just parrot Tory lies. Or, watch Channel 4 News on Monday night. The minister himself said that having men visually inspecting tracks was old fashioned and we don;t need them and they can do digital inspections with trains now.
    I dont know much about trains, but I do know health and safety. You simply don’t make things less safe. You just don’t. I’d be interested to know what best practice around the world is re track inspection and other areas of contention. It may be that visual inspection by men/women walking the lines is the best way. It may be that automated trains can survey lines with technology. It may need both for best results.
    Truth is, I don’t know. I also suspect you don’t either.
    "You simply don't make things less safe".

    Railtrack did. For profit. And I do know (far too much) stuff about the railways. There absolutely are track recording equipment that can scan rails on the go. Network Rail has several such trains - but they act to supplement the visual inspections that remain critical.

    Last time we went down the "just cut the cost" route we ended up with people dead. Repeatedly. They simply did not know the condition of track and signalling equipment. So had to do emergency inspections and blanket speed restrictions until they could check and then repair everything. So we know where cutting the maintenance regime leads. This proposal has them double routine maintenance periods. To save money. They aren't even proposing to replace mk1 eyeballs with the inspection train on the same basis. Its half the maintenance the network needs now.

    Which will get people killed. Because you really do make things less safe when wazzocks without a clue about engineering make decisions for political and economic reasons.
    I take it back, you do know. Cheers for the info. I’ll qualify the statement - you shouldn’t make things less safe...
    Appreciated. @Carnyx gave the Grayrigg example. You can't rely on the inspection train. And yet the minister went on Channel 4 News last night and said that you don't need old-fashioned practices like people walking the tracks when you can have digital inspections on a train. He has *no clue* what the inspection train can and cannot do or even what needs to be inspected. But "digital" has been the solution to all the railway budget problems for a few years.

    No, you can't. This is the problem. The DfT are directing both Network Rail and the rail operators what to do. DfT wazzocks don't have the first clue what they are talking about. Ministers definitely don't. But they are directing NR and saying "cut the staff, save the money".

    People will die. Again.
    The DfT, DfE and DoH...any more departments that are more useless than a bull's udder?
    Currently inspections are done both manually and by inspection trains.

    I've just asked on a railway discord server and there are, seemingly, no plans to increase the number of inspection trains, so what is going to perform the tasks currently done manually?
    Job lot of pixies.
    Far too often with this Government my mind goes back to this from South Park...

    image
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
    The main reason they voted Tory was tighter immigration controls and lower taxes, if they want higher taxes and more spending they would vote Labour
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,226
    HYUFD said:

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Most who work in financial services still vote Tory and they tend to live in the Home Counties, they are not Islington based left liberals who work in the top ranks of the public sector, public law or the media and arts
    Most I meet are apathetic. If they vote they trend Tory because tax. But you meet plenty of Labour voters. And a far higher share of disgruntled Lib Dem voting Tories than in the general pop. Also in my experience the Brexit voting split for financial services workers was far closer to the national average than the London average.

  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Many people look at Frank Spencer and / or Mr Bean and think he's a more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Grant Shapps or Mick Lynch? Who would you want beside you in a trench?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,084
    HYUFD said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Still higher than the 19% the Conservatives got in Wales in 1997, the 21% they got in 2001 and 2005 and matching the 26% Cameron got in Wales in 2010
    Yet your Welsh nationalist friends are coming up fast on the inside….
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    HYUFD said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Still higher than the 19% the Conservatives got in Wales in 1997, the 21% they got in 2001 and 2005 and matching the 26% Cameron got in Wales in 2010
    None of which led to a Conservative majority.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited June 2022
    moonshine said:

    HYUFD said:

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Most who work in financial services still vote Tory and they tend to live in the Home Counties, they are not Islington based left liberals who work in the top ranks of the public sector, public law or the media and arts
    Most I meet are apathetic. If they vote they trend Tory because tax. But you meet plenty of Labour voters. And a far higher share of disgruntled Lib Dem voting Tories than in the general pop. Also in my experience the Brexit voting split for financial services workers was far closer to the national average than the London average.

    Yes, financial services workers who live in London tend to be more Conservative than the average Londoner and in the Home Counties financial services commuters have long been the cornerstone of big Tory majorities. They may be less pro Brexit than the redwall but they are also more pro Brexit than London was
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013
    HYUFD said:

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
    The main reason they voted Tory was tighter immigration controls and lower taxes, if they want higher taxes and more spending they would vote Labour
    But you Tories have given them the highest spending and highest taxes of anyone.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884
    Foxy said:

    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Grant Shapps or Mick Lynch? Who would you want beside you in a trench?
    Shapps. Like a certain pb member there is more than one of him...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712

    HYUFD said:

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
    The main reason they voted Tory was tighter immigration controls and lower taxes, if they want higher taxes and more spending they would vote Labour
    But you Tories have given them the highest spending and highest taxes of anyone.
    Not more than Brown let alone Labour governments of the 1960s and 1970s and voters earning under £35k have even seen an NI cut
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,226
    eek said:

    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Many people look at Frank Spencer and / or Mr Bean and think he's a more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    The Americans get McConaughey, Clooney and Stiller as potential ringers for Biden. And we get Frank Spencer and Mr Bean? Can’t we at least sub in Michael Caine, Danny Craig or Big Dris Elba?

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922
    Meanwhile, in the Wild, Wild East of London:







  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
    The main reason they voted Tory was tighter immigration controls and lower taxes, if they want higher taxes and more spending they would vote Labour
    But you Tories have given them the highest spending and highest taxes of anyone.
    Not more than Brown let alone Labour governments of the 1960s and 1970s and voters earning under £35k have even seen an NI cut
    Another stupid lie.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,773

    Good evening. I want to send all PBers food and positive thoughts for the evening.

    Quail eggs and celery salt for me please
  • CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    BJO please explain
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
    The main reason they voted Tory was tighter immigration controls and lower taxes, if they want higher taxes and more spending they would vote Labour
    But you Tories have given them the highest spending and highest taxes of anyone.
    Not more than Brown let alone Labour governments of the 1960s and 1970s and voters earning under £35k have even seen an NI cut
    Another stupid lie.
    You are Mick Lynch and I claim the 5 pounds.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    moonshine said:

    eek said:

    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Many people look at Frank Spencer and / or Mr Bean and think he's a more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    The Americans get McConaughey, Clooney and Stiller as potential ringers for Biden. And we get Frank Spencer and Mr Bean? Can’t we at least sub in Michael Caine, Danny Craig or Big Dris Elba?

    I believe Eddie Izzard is trying to become the Labour candidate for Sheffield Central...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    BJO please explain
    Drakeford, not Starmer?
  • Foxy said:

    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Grant Shapps or Mick Lynch? Who would you want beside you in a trench?
    Shapps. Like a certain pb member there is more than one of him...
    Shapps.

    Treat it like running away from a bear. You don't need to do run faster than/outwit the bear, just faster than/outwit the guy you're next to.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 15,545
    edited June 2022
    What happened to Johnson's "plan for a high wage, high skill economy" ? Is that last year's fish supper wrapper response to fuel shortages? His "plan" today it seems is for lower wages and lower skills.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922

    I would just like to point out that Dr Sunil's yellow penning of the rail network is at "Baker Level", while the real hard-core Gricers do it at "Quail Level".

    While for the former, simply travelling on the line from A to B is sufficient, for the latter they need to travel over every single bit of track - every crossover, every loop, every siding, every platform at every station. Railtour operators are able to fill trains with these Quailiacs by offering them the chance to travel into a freight yard or through the carriage washers at a depot.

    Note: Baker and Quail are two rail atlases that provide different levels of detail.

    Oh, and I just thought of the term Qualiac.

    Well, I'm on the GENSHEET newsgroup, but only to look out for Baker level oddities!

    I still try to do each route in both directions if possible*, and ride the "fast" and "slow" lines where quadrupling occurs.

    But crossovers and sidings? Not for me frankly!

    (* Whitby to 'Boro westbound, and Gainsborough to Doncaster westbound still to do, for example)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069

    Foxy said:

    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Grant Shapps or Mick Lynch? Who would you want beside you in a trench?
    Shapps. Like a certain pb member there is more than one of him...
    Shapps.

    Treat it like running away from a bear. You don't need to do run faster than/outwit the bear, just faster than/outwit the guy you're next to.
    Yes, but the bear would run away after seeing Lynch.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,226
    eek said:

    moonshine said:

    eek said:

    Tres said:

    The big danger for the RMT surely is that they strike and its met by a rather big shrug as people work from home, drive or otherwise get on with their lives without the services of RMT staff just fine.

    The big danger in withholding your labour, is when people realise that actually they can cope just fine without it.

    The big danger for the government is people look at Lynch and think he's a far more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    Many people look at Frank Spencer and / or Mr Bean and think he's a more credible leader than anyone in the cabinet.
    The Americans get McConaughey, Clooney and Stiller as potential ringers for Biden. And we get Frank Spencer and Mr Bean? Can’t we at least sub in Michael Caine, Danny Craig or Big Dris Elba?

    I believe Eddie Izzard is trying to become the Labour candidate for Sheffield Central...
    She’d (they’d?) make a good backbencher but hard to imagine on the front bench.

    Incidentally I am all over this McConaughey for Pres thing. Son of Texas turned Hollywood idol. If he made it through the primaries, he’d sweep up Texas and Cali and the rest would be moot.

    As for ‘sleb candidates for PM in the Uk. I’ve said it here many times. I want JK Rowling as leader of the Labour Party. She would get me voting Labour.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    My main objection to strikes is that they are BORING. People hoping for more money. Exciting, not

    Its also people hoping not to have half of their safety colleagues fired by the government leading to insufficient maintenance and massive accidents like we had 20 years ago.

    This is the key point that keeps being missed. When they say they are striking to protect jobs, ask what the jobs are. The government have directed Network Rail to make massive cuts to maintenance and inspections. Which will literally leave people dead. Again.
    Who cares about the horrors of deferred maintenance? The hours and hours worth of delays.

    If that affects the Me of 2025, that's not my problem. What has future self ever done for me anyway?
    My future self is such a dick. He's fatter and balder, and still has the gall to sit in smug judgement of all my mistakes.
    Is that why you're trying to saddle him with cirrhosis?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,773
    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone think rail workers don’t deserve a pay rise? Essentially that is what we are arguing

    It's wider than that though, isn't it?
    Should people who work have a pay rise of only 3% at a time of 11% inflation? And a labour shortage.
    Or not?
    That's the issue.
    Which workers doing a useful job in any sort of service industry, manufacturing etc DON'T deserve a pay rise? I doubt if between us we can name any.

    Once seen in that light actions like the current one can be seen as fights not just with an employer, but fights seeking an advantage over other, often less well paid, workers.

    It is essential to the doctrines of the left that this particular discussion doesn't take place. The media largely connive with this.



    Additionally it’s a monopoly and an essential service.

    If BA staff go on strike customers can use other competitors - it’s the company that suffers.

    When the rail workers go on strike it is the passengers who suffer / there is no alternative for many. Effectively passengers are being held hostage by the unions seeking to cause political pain for the government and there by extract payment

  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    kle4 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    North Shropshire was a 23k con Maj, almost entirely before partygate. Honiton is 24k. Why is there any doubt it goes lib dem on Thursday?

    Lightning needing to strike twice.
    My reasoning goes like this. Remember I called Shropshire North right, made some money, and took lots of PB flak in build up.. My gut feeling on this one is different. My reasoning is when the big turn round in Shropshire North happened, Downing Street party’s was all the political and main news even Ant and Dec being angry, but this happens against a different backdrop, so all that anger has to be baked in now despite off the news and electorate not moved on with partygate fatigue. Is it baked in to all Tory performance now? Secondly, if it was general election you won’t get uniform swinging, you may get 7 somewhere, 2 nearby, 5 down the road - all constituency electorates have their own psychology and views of things. Do you trust this particular electorate to be on same wave length as mid term bloody nose or is it not in their DNA.
    I still think LD win by 5000 votes or so but the odd line in reports has made me wonder, like how the same raw anger that was present in N Shropshire isn't there, a throwaway about 'hes doing his best' responses etc.....
    Set against that is the LD bullshit made up internal poll garbage 'its so close guys!!' = LDs winning here
    Love the made up newspaper, it looks so bloody real Woolie, the made up opinion poll, made up messaging - it’s not just bar charts we make up! Lol.

    To be honest though, that is the way to fight and win, squeeze every drop of vote out the place. As well as obviously lying, it’s bloody slick campaign. 😇

    We all think it will be close not clear win for anyone? I have this theory it’s not just about counting pebbles, or looking at media narratives, each part of country has it own culture and psychologies will see it all differently. In. Fact this could vary from town to town constituency to constituency.

    If I find out Lib Dems havn’t won, being a northerner, I might post something like, inbred wurzle twats with brains pickled on farmhouse cider incapable of knowing right from wrong as they munch their chittering.

    If anything such a result proves my theory right.
    Oh to upload pics, @MoonRabbit you need to use the Vanilla Forums version of PB.

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/10606/the-lds-step-up-the-tactical-squeeze-on-lab-voters-in-devon-politicalbetting-com#latest

    When you start a post or reply, you'll see a "picture" icon near the top right of the editing window, which will allow you to upload pics direct from your phone or computer!
    Did someone mention Liz Truss


  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    FF43 said:

    What happened to Johnson's "plan for a high wage, high skill economy" ? Is that last year's fish supper wrapper response to fuel shortages? His "plan" today it seems is for lower wages and lower skills.

    A very quick edit of my post from earlier.



  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    Meanwhile, in the Wild, Wild East of London:







    That’s barking that is! 😆
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    What happened to Johnson's "plan for a high wage, high skill economy" ? Is that last year's fish supper wrapper response to fuel shortages? His "plan" today it seems is for lower wages and lower skills.

    A very quick edit of my post from earlier.



    Somewhere in-between, with this government I think.


    Today's random idea
    ??????????????????
    Underpants
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745

    Meanwhile, in the Wild, Wild East of London:







    That’s barking that is! 😆
    I'm in East Ham which makes me very nearly Barking :)
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,745

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
    It's still a 5% swing to Labour from 2019 with the Conservative share down 10 points but the beneficiaries are Plaid who are up 6 so the Con-PC swing an impressive 8%.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922

    Meanwhile, in the Wild, Wild East of London:







    That’s barking that is! 😆
    And in Ilford North you can find a certain Barkingside :)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    pigeon said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
    The Tories clearly aren't an English nationalist party. If they were then they'd be advocating policies such as an English Parliament and junking the antiquated Barnett Formula in favour of something modern and logical that they'd also fix to be much less generous to the remainder of the UK.

    What the Tories actually are is a moral and philosophical vacuum. They've no vision of our future and no aspirations for the country, just empty rhetoric. They exist only to perpetuate themselves in office, and their most consistent policy positions - pump priming house prices, keeping taxes on assets low, ramping up pensions but suppressing wages, i.e. diverting an ever-increasing fraction of national wealth from the young and workers on moderate incomes towards well-off pensioners and the rich - are the product of having assembled a winning electoral coalition which must now be bribed at everybody else's expense.
    While watching the Tories flap about like a trout on the river bank is quite entertaining, Labour do need to have the look of an alternative government. Starmer is just going to bore us to death.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    TimS said:

    Thanks to right wing media the definition of “woke” continues to expand and will not stop until it comes to mean “anything that’s in opposition to the Conservative party”.

    Unions: woke
    Big business: way too woke
    Pro-European tendencies: woke
    Teaching foreign languages at school: woke
    The metric system: woke as fuck
    Britain’s capital city, the whole of Surrey and Berkshire and all settlements north of Carlisle: yep, you guessed it, woke

    Here you go, a definitive guide to The Wokeness, for dim lefties who keep making this retarded point, believing it to be original if not interesting


    Woke Religion: A Taxonomy
    By
    @peterboghossian
    and
    @ShellenbergerMD



    https://twitter.com/peterboghossian/status/1458781564964331520?s=20&t=ZKME03Kosfa8ZzI3mJWkww
    Your retort is exactly the issue. The “anti-woke” have decided that everyone not right wing is therefore their caricature of woke.

    Most of us live our lives, try not to go out of our way to offend people for the sake of it, but object to the more puritanical attitudes of the Roundheads that populate parts of the left.

    But our pretty mainstream, normie and dare I say Blairite, views get grouped the Mail and friends as woke. So guess what, we stop listening to them. If you expand your list of enemies to incorporate most people in the country then generally in a democracy you end up losing.

    Everyone banged on in 2016 about how elite metropolitan Britain invented a fantasy globalist paradise that ignored the real voters. Now their opposite make the same mistake.
    You didn't even read it, and if you did you still probably wouldn't get it

    Intelligent lefties like you that do not accept the existential peril of Wokeness are a major part of the problem. You just think it is cranks, social justice warriors, etc. It is waaaaay beyond that
    No, the difference is I’m comfortable with it because I know social progress works through some form of dialectic.

    If I panicked at every bonkers proclamation by the Christian Right (and OK, some woke warriors do because it’s their oxygen) I’d be a quivering wreck.

    I just don’t have the same world view that we are a declining civilisation wrecked by decadence.
    By far the most important nation in the West is the USA. It is the armoury of the West and it’s ultimate bastion: with the constitutional defence of Free Speech and so forth

    If you don’t see rampant decline in America you’re a fucking moron, with all due respect

    And, yes, the decline is being accelerated by lunatics on the Left AND the Right
    America's problem is huge inequality combined with a collapse in social mobility, which is feeding a downwards spiral of hopelessness, rage and extremism. Its decline could be arrested and reversed by a couple of decades of moderate social democracy. I don't expect this to happen, though.
    America was at its height under Reagan, hardly a social democrat!
    What you mean is that America started going downhill under Reagan.
    The opposite he reversed the policies of the social democrat, high tax, high spend Carter and oversaw the economic boom of the 1980s. While also moving America on from the humiliation of Vietnam to begin the process of winning the Cold War and becoming the unchallenged global superpower
    His attack on the unions and cuts to government spending started the relentless rise in inequality and collapse in social mobility that has left America in the mess it is in now.
    Unemployment when Reagan left office in 1989 was 5% compared to 8% when he entered office in 1980. Union power in the US as in the UK pre Thatcher needed to be curbed
    What was UK unemployment when Thatcher became PM and what was it when she left?
    Little different admittedly but inflation fell from 15% in 1979 to 10% in 1990 and under 5% when Major left office
    :open_mouth::open_mouth::open_mouth:
    It wasn’t between 10 and 15 throughout the 80’s. It blipped in late 80’s after over zealous tax cutting.

    You got that one wrong HY.

    And I’m far from sober sat on a club toilet and I know that
  • Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
    The Tories clearly aren't an English nationalist party. If they were then they'd be advocating policies such as an English Parliament and junking the antiquated Barnett Formula in favour of something modern and logical that they'd also fix to be much less generous to the remainder of the UK.

    What the Tories actually are is a moral and philosophical vacuum. They've no vision of our future and no aspirations for the country, just empty rhetoric. They exist only to perpetuate themselves in office, and their most consistent policy positions - pump priming house prices, keeping taxes on assets low, ramping up pensions but suppressing wages, i.e. diverting an ever-increasing fraction of national wealth from the young and workers on moderate incomes towards well-off pensioners and the rich - are the product of having assembled a winning electoral coalition which must now be bribed at everybody else's expense.
    While watching the Tories flap about like a trout on the river bank is quite entertaining, Labour do need to have the look of an alternative government. Starmer is just going to bore us to death.
    If he bores everyone to death, he can cast the only vote and be PM for life.

    He's an evil genius.
  • The Treasury on Tuesday confirmed that the pension “triple lock” will be reinstated after it was put on pause during the pandemic, taking the annual payout for retirees beyond £10,000 for the first time

    Bunch of utter twats
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884

    The Treasury on Tuesday confirmed that the pension “triple lock” will be reinstated after it was put on pause during the pandemic, taking the annual payout for retirees beyond £10,000 for the first time

    Bunch of utter twats

    Seems tone deaf. Anyone working in the public sector, such as the care staff, nurses, doctors etc will not get such largesse.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    stodge said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
    It's still a 5% swing to Labour from 2019 with the Conservative share down 10 points but the beneficiaries are Plaid who are up 6 so the Con-PC swing an impressive 8%.
    Which would still win Plaid just one extra seat, Ynys Mon and which they won in 1997 for example
  • The Treasury on Tuesday confirmed that the pension “triple lock” will be reinstated after it was put on pause during the pandemic, taking the annual payout for retirees beyond £10,000 for the first time

    Bunch of utter twats

    Seems tone deaf. Anyone working in the public sector, such as the care staff, nurses, doctors etc will not get such largesse.
    Justifying the strikes quite frankly, what have the elderly done during COVID?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    edited June 2022
    Completely off topic, but I've been asked by an American friend: Are children under 12 being offered the covid vaccine in the UK?

    I've lost track.

    Thanks
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712

    The Treasury on Tuesday confirmed that the pension “triple lock” will be reinstated after it was put on pause during the pandemic, taking the annual payout for retirees beyond £10,000 for the first time

    Bunch of utter twats

    Seems tone deaf. Anyone working in the public sector, such as the care staff, nurses, doctors etc will not get such largesse.
    Yes but even in 2019 most of the public sector voted Labour while the vast majority of pensioners voted Tory
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    Marijuana legalised in Thailand.
    When will this wokery end?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    Completely off topic, but I've been asked by an American friend: Are children under 12 being offered the covid vaccine in the UK?

    I've lost track.

    Thanks

    Your answer for him is, what’s covid?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884

    The Treasury on Tuesday confirmed that the pension “triple lock” will be reinstated after it was put on pause during the pandemic, taking the annual payout for retirees beyond £10,000 for the first time

    Bunch of utter twats

    Seems tone deaf. Anyone working in the public sector, such as the care staff, nurses, doctors etc will not get such largesse.
    Justifying the strikes quite frankly, what have the elderly done during COVID?
    Apart from dying in large numbers (>50% of those who have died were over 80), they’ve watched the rest of the population lock down repeatedly, mainly to save their entitled asses...
    Time for some fairness.
  • Completely off topic, but I've been asked by an American friend: Are children under 12 being offered the covid vaccine in the UK?

    I've lost track.

    Thanks

    Yes. My children were both offered it, aged 5 and 7.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,773

    Interesting meeting:

    @trussliz
    Met @NikkiHaley to talk about the importance of ensuring Putin loses in Ukraine and standing up to aggressors and authoritarians around the world in defence of freedom and liberty 🇬🇧 🇺🇸


    https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/1539350330801983488

    Nikki’s a sweetheart. But tough as old boots. She’d make short work of Liz 😜
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 14,884

    Completely off topic, but I've been asked by an American friend: Are children under 12 being offered the covid vaccine in the UK?

    I've lost track.

    Thanks

    I believe yes.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    dixiedean said:

    Marijuana legalised in Thailand.
    When will this wokery end?

    You can be pro marijuana and still anti Woke, Leon for example is very anti Woke but has still tried virtually every drug under the sun
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    Meanwhile, in the Wild, Wild East of London:







    That’s barking that is! 😆
    And in Ilford North you can find a certain Barkingside :)
    That sounds barking too 😆
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069

    Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
    The Tories clearly aren't an English nationalist party. If they were then they'd be advocating policies such as an English Parliament and junking the antiquated Barnett Formula in favour of something modern and logical that they'd also fix to be much less generous to the remainder of the UK.

    What the Tories actually are is a moral and philosophical vacuum. They've no vision of our future and no aspirations for the country, just empty rhetoric. They exist only to perpetuate themselves in office, and their most consistent policy positions - pump priming house prices, keeping taxes on assets low, ramping up pensions but suppressing wages, i.e. diverting an ever-increasing fraction of national wealth from the young and workers on moderate incomes towards well-off pensioners and the rich - are the product of having assembled a winning electoral coalition which must now be bribed at everybody else's expense.
    While watching the Tories flap about like a trout on the river bank is quite entertaining, Labour do need to have the look of an alternative government. Starmer is just going to bore us to death.
    If he bores everyone to death, he can cast the only vote and be PM for life.

    He's an evil genius.
    It could be a zombie government without a ghost of a chance of going full term.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Foxy said:

    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone think rail workers don’t deserve a pay rise? Essentially that is what we are arguing

    It's wider than that though, isn't it?
    Should people who work have a pay rise of only 3% at a time of 11% inflation? And a labour shortage.
    Or not?
    That's the issue.
    Which workers doing a useful job in any sort of service industry, manufacturing etc DON'T deserve a pay rise? I doubt if between us we can name any.

    Once seen in that light actions like the current one can be seen as fights not just with an employer, but fights seeking an advantage over other, often less well paid, workers.

    It is essential to the doctrines of the left that this particular discussion doesn't take place. The media largely connive with this.

    If they are jealous of the leverage that unionised workers have, then they should form or join a union themselves.

    A lot of the gig economy exists by pitting worker against worker to bid down pay and conditions. They desperately need unions.
    A lot of capitalism exists by pitting company against company to bid down prices.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Marijuana legalised in Thailand.
    When will this wokery end?

    You can be pro marijuana and still anti Woke, Leon for example is very anti Woke but has still tried virtually every drug under the sun
    Correlation isn't always causation though ;)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,069
    rcs1000 said:

    Foxy said:

    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    Anyone think rail workers don’t deserve a pay rise? Essentially that is what we are arguing

    It's wider than that though, isn't it?
    Should people who work have a pay rise of only 3% at a time of 11% inflation? And a labour shortage.
    Or not?
    That's the issue.
    Which workers doing a useful job in any sort of service industry, manufacturing etc DON'T deserve a pay rise? I doubt if between us we can name any.

    Once seen in that light actions like the current one can be seen as fights not just with an employer, but fights seeking an advantage over other, often less well paid, workers.

    It is essential to the doctrines of the left that this particular discussion doesn't take place. The media largely connive with this.

    If they are jealous of the leverage that unionised workers have, then they should form or join a union themselves.

    A lot of the gig economy exists by pitting worker against worker to bid down pay and conditions. They desperately need unions.
    A lot of capitalism exists by pitting company against company to bid down prices.
    I am not disputing that, indeed one of the major ways that companies do that is by screwing their workers with worse pay and conditions.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
    The Tories clearly aren't an English nationalist party. If they were then they'd be advocating policies such as an English Parliament and junking the antiquated Barnett Formula in favour of something modern and logical that they'd also fix to be much less generous to the remainder of the UK.

    What the Tories actually are is a moral and philosophical vacuum. They've no vision of our future and no aspirations for the country, just empty rhetoric. They exist only to perpetuate themselves in office, and their most consistent policy positions - pump priming house prices, keeping taxes on assets low, ramping up pensions but suppressing wages, i.e. diverting an ever-increasing fraction of national wealth from the young and workers on moderate incomes towards well-off pensioners and the rich - are the product of having assembled a winning electoral coalition which must now be bribed at everybody else's expense.
    While watching the Tories flap about like a trout on the river bank is quite entertaining, Labour do need to have the look of an alternative government. Starmer is just going to bore us to death.
    If he bores everyone to death, he can cast the only vote and be PM for life.

    He's an evil genius.
    It could be a zombie government without a ghost of a chance of going full term.
    The spectre of that is just awful.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    Good evening. I want to send all PBers food and positive thoughts for the evening.

    Quail eggs and celery salt for me please
    Can I recommend Buck's?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 6,773
    pigeon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Foxy said:

    Anyway, back on topic I'm not that surprised that Labour's strikes haven't been roundly condemned and Starmer with them. The "greedy union barons" trope is less effective when so many workers will be looking at their own position thinking the pay request sounds perfectly reasonable.

    Not a few workers are thinking "If the Rail workers get screwed, we are next, if the Rail workers get 7% then we are more likely to get that too"
    5% across the board in the public sector is doable tomorrow. That would then become the benchmark.
    And it isn't inflationary. Because it's below the inflation rate.
    If an increase at the rate of inflation is doable for old people (for that's what we must assume they'll get next Spring, because the current line is that the triple lock has only been suspended for this year,) then surely it's also doable for state employees? After all, there are more than twice as many OAPs as there are public sector workers, and pensions have been steadily rising since the triple lock was introduced whereas earned incomes are lower in real terms now than they were at the time of the GFC.

    The position of the Government at this particular moment in time appears to be that jacking up the state pension by the rate of inflation is both affordable and will have no inflationary impact, whereas applying exactly the same increase to the wages of public sector employees will cost far too much and will result in the dreaded wage-price spiral if it were to be attempted.

    The Government doesn't even try to make a logical case for any of its policies anymore. It just makes stuff up as it goes along, and then invents fantasies and lies to justify whatever today's position is. Or today's positions are, when it tries to reconcile two or more mutually incompatible ideas. I suppose that's what happens when all you exist for is to say any old bullshit that'll keep Boris Johnson in 10 Downing Street for another week.
    Actually pensions and wage increases don’t have the same inflationary impact. Wage increases in the private sector increase costs requiring increased prices. The public sector is one step removed in that they act as a benchmark.

    Increasing pensions doesn’t have the same impact - it’s just a cost that needs to be funded (so if fiscal policy is tightened to pay for it it should be disinflationary in theory)
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,088
    Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    CatMan said:

    Apologies if this has already been posted, but this I think lends credence to the idea that the Tory party is basically now an English Nationalist Party

    Welsh Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 41% (-)
    CON: 26% (-)
    PC: 16% (+3)
    LDEM: 7% (-)

    via @YouGov
    , 12 - 16 Jun
    Chgs. w/ Mar

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1539197010556993539

    Outpolling the Welsh national(ist) party in Wales might suggest otherwise.

    Having their electoral base predominately in England doesn't make them an English nationalist party.
    The Tories clearly aren't an English nationalist party. If they were then they'd be advocating policies such as an English Parliament and junking the antiquated Barnett Formula in favour of something modern and logical that they'd also fix to be much less generous to the remainder of the UK.

    What the Tories actually are is a moral and philosophical vacuum. They've no vision of our future and no aspirations for the country, just empty rhetoric. They exist only to perpetuate themselves in office, and their most consistent policy positions - pump priming house prices, keeping taxes on assets low, ramping up pensions but suppressing wages, i.e. diverting an ever-increasing fraction of national wealth from the young and workers on moderate incomes towards well-off pensioners and the rich - are the product of having assembled a winning electoral coalition which must now be bribed at everybody else's expense.
    While watching the Tories flap about like a trout on the river bank is quite entertaining, Labour do need to have the look of an alternative government. Starmer is just going to bore us to death.
    Indeed. Whilst one appreciates the rationale behind Labour not promulgating a platform of detailed policies prior to a general election campaign, they do need to promote some kind of vision and give us an idea of what and who they're actually for.

    The helpless stranded fish routine Starmer is currently enacting over the rail strikes is a case in point. He gives the impression of being so desperate to be an anodyne grey fence sitter, at pains to avoid saying anything that might upset a trades unionist here or a disgruntled passenger there, that he risks ending up being seen to stand for nothing, and to please nobody.

    It's bad enough when only the RMT is on strike, but what happens when industrial relations break down in the schools and the health service? People working in these public services are directly employed by the state and have suffered many years of dismal pay settlements. Simply telling the Government to get a grip, whilst himself behaving like a 1990s Spitting Image Paddy Ashdown parody - "I neither support low paid NHS staff, nor oppose low paid NHS staff, but somewhere in between" - ain't going to cut it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Marijuana legalised in Thailand.
    When will this wokery end?

    You can be pro marijuana and still anti Woke, Leon for example is very anti Woke but has still tried virtually every drug under the sun
    I thought that was why he was anti-woke?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Marijuana legalised in Thailand.
    When will this wokery end?

    You can be pro marijuana and still anti Woke, Leon for example is very anti Woke but has still tried virtually every drug under the sun
    Careful with that, he might sue - at the suggestion of “virtually” 😆

    Anyway, I need to get back to dancing. 🙂
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Why is @HYUFD talking about financial services wages? I thought Tory policy/Brexit was to increase the wages of the working class and not the metropolitan liberal elite?

    Because HYUFD is out of touch and doesn't know jack about the working class, or worse the Red Wall.

    As far as he's concerned we're nothing other than pasty-eating, flat-cap wearing inbreds who don't care about anything other than shutting down immigration, so nothing else matters.
    The main reason they voted Tory was tighter immigration controls and lower taxes, if they want higher taxes and more spending they would vote Labour
    But you Tories have given them the highest spending and highest taxes of anyone.
    Not more than Brown let alone Labour governments of the 1960s and 1970s and voters earning under £35k have even seen an NI cut
    Another stupid lie.
    You are Mick Lynch and I claim the 5 pounds.
    You can't blame Mick Lynch - he's trying to get things sorted out for his members before he's put on trial for accounting fraud at Autonomy.
This discussion has been closed.