Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
That's quite a story - that I shall file away for future use
I'm intrigued that the police could not prosecute. No CCTV footage? Did he claim someone else was driving?
I'm not doubting you, just curious that such an obvious ruse - run away and hide - would work
I found it bizarre that the police did nothing against him. We told them who the driver was and where he lived and they went round there but couldn't find him and did nothing else.
He tried to bring an unfair dismissal case against us saying that he was not drunk and had spent 4 hours in a pub drinking coke and that the accident had caused him to have a mental abhoration making him run away. The case never went anywhere.
Thanks
Looking back at my own life, maybe it isn't so unbelievable
In my mid 20s I went out drinking in rural Bucks with some friends; one of us had a big company car
We all got hammered in a country pub and then we drove on and my drunk mate lost control and the car span off the road and into a ditch, smashing it up entirely. Amazingly we were all unharmed - and we climbed out and walked away - and went to the next rustic pub to drink away the nerves. With much laughter
No one saw or came to inspect the car that night. Next morning we all went back to the wreck and saw that we'd missed a concrete pillar and a telegraph pole on either side: would have killed us
My friend told his company that he'd had an "accident". They came to tow away his car and gave him a new one the same day. And that was it
One result of stories like that is that the police are obsessed with breathalysing drivers after a collision. So when a driver knocked me off my bicycle the police were annoyed with me that I'd let him go before they arrived and could breathalyse him.
At first he didn't answer the phone number he'd left me, so they thought he'd done a runner, and tried to spot his number plate on the CCTV of a nearby garage. Anyway, an hour or so later he phoned them back, they went and tested him, he hadn't been drinking, and so as far as they were concerned that was that. Accident could have happened to anyone. Nothing wrong with a car driver mowing down a cyclist as long as they do it sober.
It's mad that using a car to injure/kill someone (accidentally) is regarded by the law as much more reasonable than using some other tool.
"A collision between a cyclist and a car" = vulnerable road user smashed by useless driver in huge metal box.
It's because it could be you. Or your spouse. Or your child.
A car is an essential tool of modern life. Killing someone "accidentally" (there's a clue in there) is easier to explain than "accidentally" killing them with a rivet gun....
Interesting - Tory MPs are less authoritarian than Members but more right wing on the economy. I'd suspect that's because most people do not understand economics, and while MPs also do not understand it, they are more likely to have committed to some ideological position on it.
ScotRail train drivers accept new pay deal to end disruption
ScotRail drivers will see their pay climb by 5% and also get more money for rest day and Sunday working, driving instructor and maternity pay along with a policy of no compulsory redundancies for the next five years. The nationalised train operator said 2.2% of the increase would be funded by Transport Scotland with the remaining 2.8% coming from ScotRail's funds. ScotRail came back into public ownership for the first time in 25 years in April, after previous operator Abellio had its franchise ended early over criticism of the quality of the service.
Thank feck for that - booked my "trans-Inverness" tickets last week for travel next week
Her Majesty’s Scottish Ministers aim to please! 🚂 🏔 🥃 ⛳️ 🎻
But will it work? The latest strikes were not by Scottish train drivers but by other Unions, specifically the NUR. If they don't reach a deal the current chaos will continue.
Isn't that involving HMG rather than the SG? Or have I missed something?
Yes it is, its a national problem but it is also why our rail service is worse than usual and the deal with Scotrail drivers doesn't fix it.
It's going to be wall to wall Con for the next 10 weeks. That lead won't last.
Utterly meaningless until the Tories have a new leader.
I disagree with you both - the further something falls behind the further it has to climb back. The Tories can lose the next election in the coming months.
What do you think is plunging Tories into the 20s and elevating Labour in the polls?
A big swing from Tory to "don't know" pending the result of the leadership election.
I have observed that some of the more recent polling have a 60+ antipasti - below that is just how you rearrange the deckchairs today, in the case of this poll Libdem and Green only 16 deckchairs shared between them.
I must say having backed Hunt in the leadership race I find it very hard to stomach that he says he thinks he might have voted leave now that he thinks about it.
I don't care about leave/remain but what opportunism.
That is quite feeble
Hunt has not got a chance
That's what's so strange.
Standing and losing for what you believe in makes sense.
Folding your beliefs to win makes sense.
Folding your beliefs and then losing, selling your soul for nothing... What's the point?
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
Watch those join EU numbers crumble - when you tell them what the cost of rejoining would be.
Never. Gonna. Happen.
I could see us joining some kind of EU-very-lite - just free trade without political union, the euro or freedom of movement (as the EU misleadingly calls abolishing immigration controls). Call it the "European Free Trade Association" or something.
But they'll never have the wit to offer that to us.
But the 1922, being part of a party favouring FPTP, will give it to Sunak in that scenario. Surely?
It feels very much like STV! They could do it in one go using preference voting but that would eliminate the games playing and where's the fun in that?
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
Watch those join EU numbers crumble - when you tell them what the cost of rejoining would be.
Never. Gonna. Happen.
I could see us joining some kind of EU-very-lite - just free trade without political union, the euro or freedom of movement (as the EU misleadingly calls abolishing immigration controls). Call it the "European Free Trade Association" or something.
But they'll never have the wit to offer that to us.
On the other hand though, Macron at least seems to be wanting to create just that?
You have sort of described an “outside Lane” EU membership, that wasn’t on offer when Cameron negotiated or the UK voted. A vote in UK within next 15 years to join the type of association you described would likely get 60% yes.
But an awful lot of design and building till we go over that bridge.
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
Watch those join EU numbers crumble - when you tell them what the cost of rejoining would be.
Never. Gonna. Happen.
Are you saying those responding to the poll are too thick to know what they are doing?
Kemi is a buy in as much as Sunak is far too short: her current price of 32 or so Betfair looks moderately interesting, but no more.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
With an H ... And a shame it would never get further than Glasgow Central. Would have been good on a diesel on the West Highland or Highland lines.
I managed to walk to the Wolf's lair in Loch an Eilean once. I can't say it was a good plan but the ice was at least a foot thick and it was below -20C...
Badenoch refers to the drowned land of the River Spey (The Insh Marshes being the remnant example) so probably the Highland line would be correct.
I've been out the lair on Lochindorb. Didn't realise he had two.
The castle on Lochindorb is no doubt the major construction, but he did build the structure on Loch an Eilean too.
It might just have been a hunting lodge I guess - it isn't very big.
Kemi is a buy in as much as Sunak is far too short: her current price of 32 or so Betfair looks moderately interesting, but no more.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
There is the small matter of being an incompetent psychopathic lunatic, although in this field that is more of a how do you stand out problem.
Kemi is a buy in as much as Sunak is far too short: her current price of 32 or so Betfair looks moderately interesting, but no more.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
I've generally been surprised at her low ratings on the ConHome ratings.
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
That's quite a story - that I shall file away for future use
I'm intrigued that the police could not prosecute. No CCTV footage? Did he claim someone else was driving?
I'm not doubting you, just curious that such an obvious ruse - run away and hide - would work
I found it bizarre that the police did nothing against him. We told them who the driver was and where he lived and they went round there but couldn't find him and did nothing else.
He tried to bring an unfair dismissal case against us saying that he was not drunk and had spent 4 hours in a pub drinking coke and that the accident had caused him to have a mental abhoration making him run away. The case never went anywhere.
Thanks
Looking back at my own life, maybe it isn't so unbelievable
In my mid 20s I went out drinking in rural Bucks with some friends; one of us had a big company car
We all got hammered in a country pub and then we drove on and my drunk mate lost control and the car span off the road and into a ditch, smashing it up entirely. Amazingly we were all unharmed - and we climbed out and walked away - and went to the next rustic pub to drink away the nerves. With much laughter
No one saw or came to inspect the car that night. Next morning we all went back to the wreck and saw that we'd missed a concrete pillar and a telegraph pole on either side: would have killed us
My friend told his company that he'd had an "accident". They came to tow away his car and gave him a new one the same day. And that was it
One result of stories like that is that the police are obsessed with breathalysing drivers after a collision. So when a driver knocked me off my bicycle the police were annoyed with me that I'd let him go before they arrived and could breathalyse him.
At first he didn't answer the phone number he'd left me, so they thought he'd done a runner, and tried to spot his number plate on the CCTV of a nearby garage. Anyway, an hour or so later he phoned them back, they went and tested him, he hadn't been drinking, and so as far as they were concerned that was that. Accident could have happened to anyone. Nothing wrong with a car driver mowing down a cyclist as long as they do it sober.
It's mad that using a car to injure/kill someone (accidentally) is regarded by the law as much more reasonable than using some other tool.
"A collision between a cyclist and a car" = vulnerable road user smashed by useless driver in huge metal box.
It's because it could be you. Or your spouse. Or your child.
A car is an essential tool of modern life. Killing someone "accidentally" (there's a clue in there) is easier to explain than "accidentally" killing them with a rivet gun....
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
That's quite a story - that I shall file away for future use
I'm intrigued that the police could not prosecute. No CCTV footage? Did he claim someone else was driving?
I'm not doubting you, just curious that such an obvious ruse - run away and hide - would work
I found it bizarre that the police did nothing against him. We told them who the driver was and where he lived and they went round there but couldn't find him and did nothing else.
He tried to bring an unfair dismissal case against us saying that he was not drunk and had spent 4 hours in a pub drinking coke and that the accident had caused him to have a mental abhoration making him run away. The case never went anywhere.
Thanks
Looking back at my own life, maybe it isn't so unbelievable
In my mid 20s I went out drinking in rural Bucks with some friends; one of us had a big company car
We all got hammered in a country pub and then we drove on and my drunk mate lost control and the car span off the road and into a ditch, smashing it up entirely. Amazingly we were all unharmed - and we climbed out and walked away - and went to the next rustic pub to drink away the nerves. With much laughter
No one saw or came to inspect the car that night. Next morning we all went back to the wreck and saw that we'd missed a concrete pillar and a telegraph pole on either side: would have killed us
My friend told his company that he'd had an "accident". They came to tow away his car and gave him a new one the same day. And that was it
One result of stories like that is that the police are obsessed with breathalysing drivers after a collision. So when a driver knocked me off my bicycle the police were annoyed with me that I'd let him go before they arrived and could breathalyse him.
At first he didn't answer the phone number he'd left me, so they thought he'd done a runner, and tried to spot his number plate on the CCTV of a nearby garage. Anyway, an hour or so later he phoned them back, they went and tested him, he hadn't been drinking, and so as far as they were concerned that was that. Accident could have happened to anyone. Nothing wrong with a car driver mowing down a cyclist as long as they do it sober.
It's mad that using a car to injure/kill someone (accidentally) is regarded by the law as much more reasonable than using some other tool.
"A collision between a cyclist and a car" = vulnerable road user smashed by useless driver in huge metal box.
It's because it could be you. Or your spouse. Or your child.
A car is an essential tool of modern life. Killing someone "accidentally" (there's a clue in there) is easier to explain than "accidentally" killing them with a rivet gun....
In fact, the government is changing the sentencing guidelines so that death by dangerous driving can bring a life sentence, in line with manslaughter. Good.
Kemi is a buy in as much as Sunak is far too short: her current price of 32 or so Betfair looks moderately interesting, but no more.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
There is the small matter of being an incompetent psychopathic lunatic, although in this field that is more of a how do you stand out problem.
So you agree the membership will find her palatable
Meanwhile and getting in before Malmesbury: The hospitalisation figures with covid in England have just dropped for the past four days - and look very much like the trend has started to bend. If so, we have quite possibly already hit the maximum level of infection incidence and be starting on the way down, infections-wise.
Still early to say (as hospitalisations lag infections, albeit with a bit of a mix-up due to incidental admissions), but we may well max out at or below 15,000 in hospital with covid. I'm hoping to see the number come in below 16,600 as a maximum, as it would point to this wave being a bit less than the last (which was in itself a little less than the first Omicron wave). Not by a big amount, but it does give hope to the idea that each one runs into a harsher and harsher immunity blanket, despite immune evasion.
Dirty Labour and Green on slide as Reform surge in this one, despite the rudderless Tory infighting 🤭
Next time HY or Big Owls quotes 2019 polls, May’s Tories below 28 and Corbyn leading, it is prior to Conservatives swallowing Blukip whole, and excreting so many moderates. During those low Tory scores in 2019, what were they with UKIP on top?
It's not a unique observation, and I know it's unfair, but I have to think Sunak's chances are hit by how wealthy he is. Personal wealth should not particularly matter, one can understand those who are struggling and best placed to help them without struggling yourselve, but he is so damn rich it is hard to look past.
Many of the rest are very well off, but they didn't come from money (and unlike Sunak are not near billionaire levels).
Being rich did not stop David Cameron or Mrs Thatcher. Perhaps this time the degree is different but Jacob Rees-Mogg and Zac Goldsmith somehow struggled on despite having north of £100 million under the mattress. I'm not convinced voters give it much thought and if they do, aren't Tories supposed to have money?
Kemi is a buy in as much as Sunak is far too short: her current price of 32 or so Betfair looks moderately interesting, but no more.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
Sky saying she is in discussion with the hard Brexiteers and is expected to stand
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
Watch those join EU numbers crumble - when you tell them what the cost of rejoining would be.
Never. Gonna. Happen.
I could see us joining some kind of EU-very-lite - just free trade without political union, the euro or freedom of movement (as the EU misleadingly calls abolishing immigration controls). Call it the "European Free Trade Association" or something.
But they'll never have the wit to offer that to us.
You mean, basically what we had before Maastricht?
Mr. Gezou, the Romans and Greeks had slaves. As did the Norse and Anglo-Saxons, the Arabs and the Chinese. Barbary pirates seized whites and sold them as slaves to the Ottomans.
The major difference is that only the trans-Atlantic trade is on BLM's radar because it's the only one that comes close to fitting their nonsense, and that's disregarding the slaves were sold by black traders in Africa, and the trade was ended by the British Empire (which does not wipe out what went before but is worthy of acknowledgement).
As for racism in America, that's certainly, sadly, still in existence. Fighting it with BLM and related nonsense is as foolish as trying to fight inequality with Communism.
Slavery in North America lasted from 1526 to 1865, so 339 years. The transatlantic slave trade as a whole shipped over 12 million Africans to the Americas. To call that a “small slice” seems odd. It is, for obvious reasons, of rather more import to the modern US than the practices of slavery in ancient Athens or among the Anglo-Saxons. The last US slave died in my lifetime: it’s a lot more recent than slavery among the Norse.
I’m glad you acknowledge that racism is alive and well in the US. How do you think it should be fought? What is problematic about highlighting the high rate of police killings of Black people in the US?
(“bondegezou” is all one word, and it’s Dr or Prof not Mr.)
Blacks are killed by the police greater than their share of the population, but at about their share of convicted violent criminals, so it is far from certain that the high rate is unjustified overall, whatever may be the case in individual shootings.
Unarmed blacks are rather more likely than whites to be shot, but Asians and Pacific Islanders significantly less so. Does that mean that the police are discriminating in favour of those minorities?
Men are killed by the police about 25x more often than women, but as far as I know we've never had a Male Lives Matter movement. As they are much more likely than women to be violent criminals, people accept that disparity.
Another strange fact is that blacks are more likely to be killed in urban areas, while whites are in rural areas.
When I first started looking at the statistics, I was prepared to find horrible evidence of discrimination overall, but somewhat to my surprise the picture is as murky and ambigious as these matters often are. Most of the problem is a hugely over-armed police force and population, rather than racism, which no doubt exists.
There might be thought to be some degree of social injustice underlying the black community's unduly large share of violent crime and (wild guess) small share of white collar fraud, unless you think they are genetically disposed to the one more than the other?
Why US black communities of similar income and demographics are 2-4x as violent as Hispanic communities of similar disadvantage is a mystery. It clearly ISN'T genetic, because African societies are less violent on average than Latin American ones.
The most convincing theory I've heard is that after slavery, blacks in the rural South were left to police themselves, as long as they didn't threaten white society. This led to vigilante justice in rural areas in the South. But when they moved to the big northern and western cities, the tight communities that had hitherto bound them and enabled self-policing disappeared. Violent crime was kept under some kind of control by vicious but partially effective policing until the advent of suspects' rights in the 60s and 70s undermined its legitimacy. So now you have the worst of both worlds - policing that isn't oppressive enough to be effective, but is too oppressive to allow the neighborhoods to self-police. And of course you have the drug trade, which rewards thuggishness.
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
Watch those join EU numbers crumble - when you tell them what the cost of rejoining would be.
Never. Gonna. Happen.
Are you saying those responding to the poll are too thick to know what they are doing?
Thick, no, but probably unaware that rejoining would mean joining the euro and Schengen.
Interesting - Tory MPs are less authoritarian than Members but more right wing on the economy. I'd suspect that's because most people do not understand economics, and while MPs also do not understand it, they are more likely to have committed to some ideological position on it.
It's not a unique observation, and I know it's unfair, but I have to think Sunak's chances are hit by how wealthy he is. Personal wealth should not particularly matter, one can understand those who are struggling and best placed to help them without struggling yourselve, but he is so damn rich it is hard to look past.
Many of the rest are very well off, but they didn't come from money (and unlike Sunak are not near billionaire levels).
Being rich did not stop David Cameron or Mrs Thatcher. Perhaps this time the degree is different but Jacob Rees-Mogg and Zac Goldsmith somehow struggled on despite having north of £100 million under the mattress. I'm not convinced voters give it much thought and if they do, aren't Tories supposed to have money?
During a cost of living crisis, the wealth of the people making the decisions becomes more salient. The Conservative Party has spent the last few years stoking populist fires, much against the advice of sensible voices off. If a spark lands on their own roof as a result... it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.
Dirty Labour and Green on slide as Reform surge in this one, despite the rudderless Tory infighting 🤭
Next time HY or Big Owls quotes 2019 polls, May’s Tories below 28 and Corbyn leading, it is prior to Conservatives swallowing Blukip whole, and excreting so many moderates. During those low Tory scores in 2019, what were they with UKIP on top?
General pattern since it all kicked off seems to be 3 to 4 off Tory due to uncertainty to vote. If that initial slide stabilises, new leader bounce could be the next big mover, unless wall to wall tory coverage initiates a recovery
Kemi is a buy in as much as Sunak is far too short: her current price of 32 or so Betfair looks moderately interesting, but no more.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
There is the small matter of being an incompetent psychopathic lunatic, although in this field that is more of a how do you stand out problem.
So you agree the membership will find her palatable
I have observed that some of the more recent polling have a 60+ antipasti - below that is just how you rearrange the deckchairs today, in the case of this poll Libdem and Green only 16 deckchairs shared between them.
It's not a unique observation, and I know it's unfair, but I have to think Sunak's chances are hit by how wealthy he is. Personal wealth should not particularly matter, one can understand those who are struggling and best placed to help them without struggling yourselve, but he is so damn rich it is hard to look past.
Many of the rest are very well off, but they didn't come from money (and unlike Sunak are not near billionaire levels).
Being rich did not stop David Cameron or Mrs Thatcher. Perhaps this time the degree is different but Jacob Rees-Mogg and Zac Goldsmith somehow struggled on despite having north of £100 million under the mattress. I'm not convinced voters give it much thought and if they do, aren't Tories supposed to have money?
JRM and Goldsmith are not realistic PM contenders for reasons distinct from wealth. Cameron is a pauper by comparison. I know its a difference of degree, not kind, but during a period of a cost of living crisis? I think it will have a small impact.
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
That's quite a story - that I shall file away for future use
I'm intrigued that the police could not prosecute. No CCTV footage? Did he claim someone else was driving?
I'm not doubting you, just curious that such an obvious ruse - run away and hide - would work
I found it bizarre that the police did nothing against him. We told them who the driver was and where he lived and they went round there but couldn't find him and did nothing else.
He tried to bring an unfair dismissal case against us saying that he was not drunk and had spent 4 hours in a pub drinking coke and that the accident had caused him to have a mental abhoration making him run away. The case never went anywhere.
Thanks
Looking back at my own life, maybe it isn't so unbelievable
In my mid 20s I went out drinking in rural Bucks with some friends; one of us had a big company car
We all got hammered in a country pub and then we drove on and my drunk mate lost control and the car span off the road and into a ditch, smashing it up entirely. Amazingly we were all unharmed - and we climbed out and walked away - and went to the next rustic pub to drink away the nerves. With much laughter
No one saw or came to inspect the car that night. Next morning we all went back to the wreck and saw that we'd missed a concrete pillar and a telegraph pole on either side: would have killed us
My friend told his company that he'd had an "accident". They came to tow away his car and gave him a new one the same day. And that was it
One result of stories like that is that the police are obsessed with breathalysing drivers after a collision. So when a driver knocked me off my bicycle the police were annoyed with me that I'd let him go before they arrived and could breathalyse him.
At first he didn't answer the phone number he'd left me, so they thought he'd done a runner, and tried to spot his number plate on the CCTV of a nearby garage. Anyway, an hour or so later he phoned them back, they went and tested him, he hadn't been drinking, and so as far as they were concerned that was that. Accident could have happened to anyone. Nothing wrong with a car driver mowing down a cyclist as long as they do it sober.
It's mad that using a car to injure/kill someone (accidentally) is regarded by the law as much more reasonable than using some other tool.
"A collision between a cyclist and a car" = vulnerable road user smashed by useless driver in huge metal box.
It's because it could be you. Or your spouse. Or your child.
A car is an essential tool of modern life. Killing someone "accidentally" (there's a clue in there) is easier to explain than "accidentally" killing them with a rivet gun....
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
Jamie Wallis banned from driving for 6 months and 2500 fine. No by election.
Six months? Less than if he'd blown p****d.
I worked with someone who crashed his car into a parked Merc whilst pissed, caused £25 grands worth of damage, he abandoned his vehicle in the middle of the road and left his phone on the passenger seat. The police took the car (My company's car) into a secure compound and spent the next 24 hours trying to find the driver. He hid out in a friends house. Because the police never found him in time to prosecute for drink driving he got away with it completely. We sacked him for it but the police did nothing.
That's quite a story - that I shall file away for future use
I'm intrigued that the police could not prosecute. No CCTV footage? Did he claim someone else was driving?
I'm not doubting you, just curious that such an obvious ruse - run away and hide - would work
I found it bizarre that the police did nothing against him. We told them who the driver was and where he lived and they went round there but couldn't find him and did nothing else.
He tried to bring an unfair dismissal case against us saying that he was not drunk and had spent 4 hours in a pub drinking coke and that the accident had caused him to have a mental abhoration making him run away. The case never went anywhere.
Thanks
Looking back at my own life, maybe it isn't so unbelievable
In my mid 20s I went out drinking in rural Bucks with some friends; one of us had a big company car
We all got hammered in a country pub and then we drove on and my drunk mate lost control and the car span off the road and into a ditch, smashing it up entirely. Amazingly we were all unharmed - and we climbed out and walked away - and went to the next rustic pub to drink away the nerves. With much laughter
No one saw or came to inspect the car that night. Next morning we all went back to the wreck and saw that we'd missed a concrete pillar and a telegraph pole on either side: would have killed us
My friend told his company that he'd had an "accident". They came to tow away his car and gave him a new one the same day. And that was it
One result of stories like that is that the police are obsessed with breathalysing drivers after a collision. So when a driver knocked me off my bicycle the police were annoyed with me that I'd let him go before they arrived and could breathalyse him.
At first he didn't answer the phone number he'd left me, so they thought he'd done a runner, and tried to spot his number plate on the CCTV of a nearby garage. Anyway, an hour or so later he phoned them back, they went and tested him, he hadn't been drinking, and so as far as they were concerned that was that. Accident could have happened to anyone. Nothing wrong with a car driver mowing down a cyclist as long as they do it sober.
It's mad that using a car to injure/kill someone (accidentally) is regarded by the law as much more reasonable than using some other tool.
"A collision between a cyclist and a car" = vulnerable road user smashed by useless driver in huge metal box.
It's because it could be you. Or your spouse. Or your child.
A car is an essential tool of modern life. Killing someone "accidentally" (there's a clue in there) is easier to explain than "accidentally" killing them with a rivet gun....
In fact, the government is changing the sentencing guidelines so that death by dangerous driving can bring a life sentence, in line with manslaughter. Good.
I have no problem with that change. Death by dangerous driving rarely covers an "accident" as you or I would interpret it.
Off topic, but very important, this article on the COVID variant sweeping the Unied States: "America has decided the pandemic is over. The coronavirus has other ideas.
The latest omicron offshoot, BA.5, has quickly become dominant in the United States, and thanks to its elusiveness when encountering the human immune system, is driving a wave of cases across the country.
The size of that wave is unclear because most people are testing at home or not testing at all. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the past week has reported a little more than 100,000 new cases a day on average. But infectious-disease experts know that wildly underestimates the true number, which may be as many as a million, said Eric Topol, a professor at Scripps Research who closely tracks pandemic trends." source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/07/10/omicron-variant-ba5-covid-reinfection/ (It's free, as is the rest of the Post's COVID coverage.)
(Many months ago, one commenter here remarked that it was as if the virus was conciously changing tactics so as to keep plaguing us. The commenter (and I) know that isn't true, but sometimes it sure feels as if it were true.)
A minor test of efficiency - I've sent all the candidates a short questionnaire from 26 animal welfare charities. First out of the block (less than an hour) was Tugendhat's team, asking for a clarification.
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
Watch those join EU numbers crumble - when you tell them what the cost of rejoining would be.
Never. Gonna. Happen.
Are you saying those responding to the poll are too thick to know what they are doing?
Thick, no, but probably unaware that rejoining would mean joining the euro and Schengen.
Why do you think they would be unaware of that being a possibility whilst you obviously are?
You really believe all our ills stem from leaving the EU don’t you? You really think we’ll be noticeably worse off outside. It really is like the reverse UKIP. For them everything bad was because of the EU, for you it’s Brexit.
Kemi is a buy in as much as Sunak is far too short: her current price of 32 or so Betfair looks moderately interesting, but no more.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
There is the small matter of being an incompetent psychopathic lunatic, although in this field that is more of a how do you stand out problem.
A minor test of efficiency - I've sent all the candidates a short questionnaire from 26 animal welfare charities. First out of the block (less than an hour) was Tugendhat's team, asking for a clarification.
"Thank's for noticing me" as Eyore always used to say.
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
His current EU position will suit him well enough for the next election, but Starmer's going to be under considerable pressure mid-term from backbench MPs (like Stella Creasy) to rejoin the EEA if he becomes PM. Rejoiners are going to use the Labour Party to rejoin the EEA/EU the way eurosceptics used the Conservative Party to get Brexit.
It's not a unique observation, and I know it's unfair, but I have to think Sunak's chances are hit by how wealthy he is. Personal wealth should not particularly matter, one can understand those who are struggling and best placed to help them without struggling yourselve, but he is so damn rich it is hard to look past.
Many of the rest are very well off, but they didn't come from money (and unlike Sunak are not near billionaire levels).
Being rich did not stop David Cameron or Mrs Thatcher. Perhaps this time the degree is different but Jacob Rees-Mogg and Zac Goldsmith somehow struggled on despite having north of £100 million under the mattress. I'm not convinced voters give it much thought and if they do, aren't Tories supposed to have money?
During a cost of living crisis, the wealth of the people making the decisions becomes more salient. The Conservative Party has spent the last few years stoking populist fires, much against the advice of sensible voices off. If a spark lands on their own roof as a result... it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I think one thing key to Harold Wilson's success over the years was that he always seemed to be suffering along with every one else.
She'd certainly be mine! I read about her last night. She's significantly to the right of Priti Patel and who'd have thought there would be any space there?
What is out there to the right of Patel? Pirate Libertarianism?
We have one of those so why don’t we ask St Bart for his thoughts on Bad Enoch’s platform? 😇
It depends upon what you mean as right. I'm right economically, but very liberal socially.
So that would put me well to the right on economic issues, but not on social issues were "right" is typically taken to mean illiberal (then again, the left equally tend to be illiberal nowadays too). Patel is socially "right" which I don't like, she's far too illiberal and authoritarian for my tastes.
I've not seen enough of Badenoch to judge her platform to be perfectly honest.
That’s a prompt and fair enough answer, though I did have to read it three times.
Social Libertarianism not really fitting into a left/right axis? Authoritarian/liberal is a different model than the left/right used for economics?
Sir Graham Brady, chair Nus Ghani & Will Wragg, vice Chairman
Executive: Aaron Bell Miriam Cates Jo Gideon Richard Graham Chris Green Robert Halfon Sally-Ann Hart Andrew Jones Tom Randall David Simmonds John Stevenson Martin Vickers
It's not a unique observation, and I know it's unfair, but I have to think Sunak's chances are hit by how wealthy he is. Personal wealth should not particularly matter, one can understand those who are struggling and best placed to help them without struggling yourselve, but he is so damn rich it is hard to look past.
Many of the rest are very well off, but they didn't come from money (and unlike Sunak are not near billionaire levels).
Being rich did not stop David Cameron or Mrs Thatcher. Perhaps this time the degree is different but Jacob Rees-Mogg and Zac Goldsmith somehow struggled on despite having north of £100 million under the mattress. I'm not convinced voters give it much thought and if they do, aren't Tories supposed to have money?
During a cost of living crisis, the wealth of the people making the decisions becomes more salient. The Conservative Party has spent the last few years stoking populist fires, much against the advice of sensible voices off. If a spark lands on their own roof as a result... it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I think one thing key to Harold Wilson's success over the years was that he always seemed to be suffering along with every one else.
As leader of the Labour Party, that bit was easy 😀
Sir Graham Brady, chair Nus Ghani & Will Wragg, vice Chairman
Executive: Aaron Bell Miriam Cates Jo Gideon Richard Graham Chris Green Robert Halfon Sally-Ann Hart Andrew Jones Tom Randall David Simmonds John Stevenson Martin Vickers
Sir Graham Brady, chair Nus Ghani & Will Wragg, vice Chairman
Executive: Aaron Bell Miriam Cates Jo Gideon Richard Graham Chris Green Robert Halfon Sally-Ann Hart Andrew Jones Tom Randall David Simmonds John Stevenson Martin Vickers
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
His current EU position will suit him well enough for the next election, but Starmer's going to be under considerable pressure mid-term from backbench MPs (like Stella Creasy) to rejoin the EEA if he becomes PM. Rejoiners are going to use the Labour Party to rejoin the EEA/EU the way eurosceptics used the Conservative Party to get Brexit.
That won't happen unless there's an electoral vehicle that can harm Labour by taking votes off them. The Eurosceptics only got the influence in the Conservative Party they did because the party was scared of UKIP taking votes. Who do you see doing this from a pro-European side? The Lib Dems?
It's going to be wall to wall Con for the next 10 weeks. That lead won't last.
Utterly meaningless until the Tories have a new leader.
The honeymoon will be fairly meaningless too, unless an election is called (unlikely).
Indeed. And after that is party conference season, which always sends the polls haywire.
There won't be any VI polling which is remotely meaningful until October. The copy/pasters can take a few months off...
I disagree, I think the next general election in 2024 could be decided in the coming weeks, and all the polling over this time can point us to it.
That could be right, but it's more likely to show up in the details rather than the headline VI.
We're entering one of the rare periods when normal people pay attention to politics, but I don't think we're quite there yet as there are still far too many candidates in the race.
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
His current EU position will suit him well enough for the next election, but Starmer's going to be under considerable pressure mid-term from backbench MPs (like Stella Creasy) to rejoin the EEA if he becomes PM. Rejoiners are going to use the Labour Party to rejoin the EEA/EU the way eurosceptics used the Conservative Party to get Brexit.
If the will of the people drifts that way (and the demographics are pretty suggestive), that's fine isn't it?
If it turns out that the UK's current situation isn't what future UK wants, shouldn't future UK change things?
Nah, they are narrow little nationalists, so they can’t be progressives.
Lib Dems and Lucas would actively prop up a Labour government for a term in office. The SNP wouldn't (or at least wouldn't for any price Labour would be willing to pay).
It's not a unique observation, and I know it's unfair, but I have to think Sunak's chances are hit by how wealthy he is. Personal wealth should not particularly matter, one can understand those who are struggling and best placed to help them without struggling yourselve, but he is so damn rich it is hard to look past.
Many of the rest are very well off, but they didn't come from money (and unlike Sunak are not near billionaire levels).
Being rich did not stop David Cameron or Mrs Thatcher. Perhaps this time the degree is different but Jacob Rees-Mogg and Zac Goldsmith somehow struggled on despite having north of £100 million under the mattress. I'm not convinced voters give it much thought and if they do, aren't Tories supposed to have money?
During a cost of living crisis, the wealth of the people making the decisions becomes more salient. The Conservative Party has spent the last few years stoking populist fires, much against the advice of sensible voices off. If a spark lands on their own roof as a result... it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I think one thing key to Harold Wilson's success over the years was that he always seemed to be suffering along with every one else.
As leader of the Labour Party, that bit was easy 😀
Yes, he suffered for his principles so when he assumed office he ensured we did too. ;-)
Actually, History is being quite kind to him - generally competent and kept us out of 'Nam. Puts him higher than most of his successors.
It's going to be wall to wall Con for the next 10 weeks. That lead won't last.
Utterly meaningless until the Tories have a new leader.
The honeymoon will be fairly meaningless too, unless an election is called (unlikely).
Indeed. And after that is party conference season, which always sends the polls haywire.
There won't be any VI polling which is remotely meaningful until October. The copy/pasters can take a few months off...
I disagree, I think the next general election in 2024 could be decided in the coming weeks, and all the polling over this time can point us to it.
That could be right, but it's more likely to show up in the details rather than the headline VI.
We're entering one of the rare periods when normal people pay attention to politics, but I don't think we're quite there yet as there are still far too many candidates in the race.
Agree. I think the winner of the leadership race in either main party tends to get a “winner’s” bonus. Unless they are a loon. And the the contest helps to define the debate in that party’s terms.
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
His current EU position will suit him well enough for the next election, but Starmer's going to be under considerable pressure mid-term from backbench MPs (like Stella Creasy) to rejoin the EEA if he becomes PM. Rejoiners are going to use the Labour Party to rejoin the EEA/EU the way eurosceptics used the Conservative Party to get Brexit.
That won't happen unless there's an electoral vehicle that can harm Labour by taking votes off them. The Eurosceptics only got the influence in the Conservative Party they did because the party was scared of UKIP taking votes. Who do you see doing this from a pro-European side? The Lib Dems?
As someone born in the early 80s my sense of what the 70s were like comes from Carry On films, the Confessions films, and the Moore Bond films.
Bring them on!
Watch either the original "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" or the movie remake. Everything was either brown or sepia in the 70s. It was a grim time and committed huge sins with wallpaper, sideburns and out-of-control flares.
Quite interesting who didn't succeed: Bernard Jenkin and Alicia Kearns (both of whom were running for re-election), Braverman campaign manager Steve Baker, former ministers Andrew Murrison and Jesse Norman https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1546531386252836865
I think the truth of it is that all Tory MPs with the exception of the odd zealot of amoeba-brain knew it was pointless, a fools charter and yet they, in a kind of Faustian pact with the braindead membership, pretended to be enthusiastic. I'd love to put all of them on a lie detector. The only person capable of fooling it would be Boris Johnson.
Having said all that, thanks to said Faustian pact, we are now stuck with it. Very little point in talking about rejoin for the next decade; it would be as divisive as Brexit was. We have to learn to live with it and engage in gradual alignment with EU. What should it be called? "Ever closer almost union"?
It's going to be wall to wall Con for the next 10 weeks. That lead won't last.
Utterly meaningless until the Tories have a new leader.
The honeymoon will be fairly meaningless too, unless an election is called (unlikely).
Indeed. And after that is party conference season, which always sends the polls haywire.
There won't be any VI polling which is remotely meaningful until October. The copy/pasters can take a few months off...
I disagree, I think the next general election in 2024 could be decided in the coming weeks, and all the polling over this time can point us to it.
That could be right, but it's more likely to show up in the details rather than the headline VI.
We're entering one of the rare periods when normal people pay attention to politics, but I don't think we're quite there yet as there are still far too many candidates in the race.
The autumn will be a very interesting time as a new PM and cabinet take office and party conference season
Until then the polls are largely for those who apply them to the current position but which is not relevant to the dramatic change in narrative coming down the track
It's not a unique observation, and I know it's unfair, but I have to think Sunak's chances are hit by how wealthy he is. Personal wealth should not particularly matter, one can understand those who are struggling and best placed to help them without struggling yourselve, but he is so damn rich it is hard to look past.
Many of the rest are very well off, but they didn't come from money (and unlike Sunak are not near billionaire levels).
Being rich did not stop David Cameron or Mrs Thatcher. Perhaps this time the degree is different but Jacob Rees-Mogg and Zac Goldsmith somehow struggled on despite having north of £100 million under the mattress. I'm not convinced voters give it much thought and if they do, aren't Tories supposed to have money?
During a cost of living crisis, the wealth of the people making the decisions becomes more salient. The Conservative Party has spent the last few years stoking populist fires, much against the advice of sensible voices off. If a spark lands on their own roof as a result... it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I think one thing key to Harold Wilson's success over the years was that he always seemed to be suffering along with every one else.
As leader of the Labour Party, that bit was easy 😀
Yes, he suffered for his principles so when he assumed office he ensured we did too. ;-)
Actually, History is being quite kind to him - generally competent and kept us out of 'Nam. Puts him higher than most of his successors.
I have observed that some of the more recent polling have a 60+ antipasti - below that is just how you rearrange the deckchairs today, in the case of this poll Libdem and Green only 16 deckchairs shared between them.
It was just a joke! (hence the LOL emoji)
We are not here to joke around Sunil. Psephologica is a serious business 👩🎓
It's going to be wall to wall Con for the next 10 weeks. That lead won't last.
Utterly meaningless until the Tories have a new leader.
The honeymoon will be fairly meaningless too, unless an election is called (unlikely).
Indeed. And after that is party conference season, which always sends the polls haywire.
There won't be any VI polling which is remotely meaningful until October. The copy/pasters can take a few months off...
I disagree, I think the next general election in 2024 could be decided in the coming weeks, and all the polling over this time can point us to it.
That could be right, but it's more likely to show up in the details rather than the headline VI.
We're entering one of the rare periods when normal people pay attention to politics, but I don't think we're quite there yet as there are still far too many candidates in the race.
Agree. I think the winner of the leadership race in either main party tends to get a “winner’s” bonus. Unless they are a loon. And the the contest helps to define the debate in that party’s terms.
Yeah, if there isn't a Tory bounce once the new leader is in place, then they're in big trouble. But if there is such a bounce, it wouldn't necessarily be significant.
As someone born in the early 80s my sense of what the 70s were like comes from Carry On films, the Confessions films, and the Moore Bond films.
Bring them on!
Watch either the original "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" or the movie remake. Everything was either brown or sepia in the 70s. It was a grim time and committed huge sins with wallpaper, sideburns and out-of-control flares.
Yes I will give you the original Tinker Tailor as the case for the prosecution.
Latest @YouGov Eurotrack poll: #EURef2 vi: Join EU 45 (+4); Stay Out 36 (-2). Fwork 9-10.6 (ch since 16-17.5). Record lead of Join vs Stay Out in this @YouGov series. https://bit.ly/3G9hMK4
His current EU position will suit him well enough for the next election, but Starmer's going to be under considerable pressure mid-term from backbench MPs (like Stella Creasy) to rejoin the EEA if he becomes PM. Rejoiners are going to use the Labour Party to rejoin the EEA/EU the way eurosceptics used the Conservative Party to get Brexit.
That won't happen unless there's an electoral vehicle that can harm Labour by taking votes off them. The Eurosceptics only got the influence in the Conservative Party they did because the party was scared of UKIP taking votes. Who do you see doing this from a pro-European side? The Lib Dems?
From a narrative point of view, Lib Dems' Europe policy hasn't really been hitting the headlines lately and I doubt they'll go in as strong on the issue as they did in 2019.
So no, I don't think either of those parties will be doing the pro-EU UKIP equivalent. Which probably means Labour is safe to sit where it's just placed itself. Unfortunately.
And Just how 'unconservative' was the GBP450bn Sunak splashed on COVID.....?
Just how 'unconservative' was the Chinese Communist Party's Lockdown policy? How 'unconservative' was furlough? How 'unconservative' was billions frittered away on fraud and wastage as Sunak tried to please SAGE and the unions.
Listening to Sunak's bullsh8t, you'd think he was just coming into government after a Corbyn administration had been deposed from office after running out of money and going to the IMF
Comments
A car is an essential tool of modern life. Killing someone "accidentally" (there's a clue in there) is easier to explain than "accidentally" killing them with a rivet gun....
Labour 42% (-1)
Conservative 31% (–)
Liberal Democrat 12% (–)
Green 5% (-2)
Scottish National Party 4% (+1)
Reform UK 5% (+3)
Other 1% (-2)
Changes +/- 7 July
https://t.co/qcXXrTvWSA https://t.co/qR40Eev8TI
Redfield in the house
I have observed that some of the more recent polling have a 60+ antipasti - below that is just how you rearrange the deckchairs today, in the case of this poll Libdem and Green only 16 deckchairs shared between them.
But they'll never have the wit to offer that to us.
She has rather stalled.
What a surprise.
The circus will be complete when Nadine joins the race.
Madness.
You have sort of described an “outside Lane” EU membership, that wasn’t on offer when Cameron negotiated or the UK voted. A vote in UK within next 15 years to join the type of association you described would likely get 60% yes.
But an awful lot of design and building till we go over that bridge.
If you want a long shot, why not Ms Patel? She's got one of the great offices of State, she's got a great backstory, and that accent has to appeal to the Red Wall.
I also think that surveys underestimate her appeal with Conservative members. At 90-odd, and with her likely to throw her hat in the ring in the next few days, I reckon she's a clear buy.
It might just have been a hunting lodge I guess - it isn't very big.
https://conservativehome.com/2022/05/30/cabinet-league-table-johnson-is-back-in-negative-ratings/
The hospitalisation figures with covid in England have just dropped for the past four days - and look very much like the trend has started to bend. If so, we have quite possibly already hit the maximum level of infection incidence and be starting on the way down, infections-wise.
Still early to say (as hospitalisations lag infections, albeit with a bit of a mix-up due to incidental admissions), but we may well max out at or below 15,000 in hospital with covid. I'm hoping to see the number come in below 16,600 as a maximum, as it would point to this wave being a bit less than the last (which was in itself a little less than the first Omicron wave). Not by a big amount, but it does give hope to the idea that each one runs into a harsher and harsher immunity blanket, despite immune evasion.
Next time HY or Big Owls quotes 2019 polls, May’s Tories below 28 and Corbyn leading, it is prior to Conservatives swallowing Blukip whole, and excreting so many moderates. During those low Tory scores in 2019, what were they with UKIP on top?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhmBfHFsq4I
The most convincing theory I've heard is that after slavery, blacks in the rural South were left to police themselves, as long as they didn't threaten white society. This led to vigilante justice in rural areas in the South. But when they moved to the big northern and western cities, the tight communities that had hitherto bound them and enabled self-policing disappeared. Violent crime was kept under some kind of control by vicious but partially effective policing until the advent of suspects' rights in the 60s and 70s undermined its legitimacy. So now you have the worst of both worlds - policing that isn't oppressive enough to be effective, but is too oppressive to allow the neighborhoods to self-police. And of course you have the drug trade, which rewards thuggishness.
But, as I say, it's just a theory.
@thetimes - Patel warns the party that the UK risks returning to the 1970s if the Conservatives don’t “grip” the cost of living crisis.
“Everyone will remember what the 1970s was like,” she warned a panel of ERG members in Parliament.
https://twitter.com/matt_dathan/status/1546517469614972929
The Conservative Party has spent the last few years stoking populist fires, much against the advice of sensible voices off. If a spark lands on their own roof as a result... it would take a heart of stone not to laugh.
I have no problem with that change. Death by dangerous driving rarely covers an "accident" as you or I would interpret it.
Thatcher would not be cutting taxes now
The pledges of Tory leadership hopefuls are fiscally unconservative and diverge from the party’s most successful leaders
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/thatcher-would-not-be-cutting-taxes-now-v6hdzj99h
The latest omicron offshoot, BA.5, has quickly become dominant in the United States, and thanks to its elusiveness when encountering the human immune system, is driving a wave of cases across the country.
The size of that wave is unclear because most people are testing at home or not testing at all. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the past week has reported a little more than 100,000 new cases a day on average. But infectious-disease experts know that wildly underestimates the true number, which may be as many as a million, said Eric Topol, a professor at Scripps Research who closely tracks pandemic trends."
source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/07/10/omicron-variant-ba5-covid-reinfection/
(It's free, as is the rest of the Post's COVID coverage.)
(Many months ago, one commenter here remarked that it was as if the virus was conciously changing tactics so as to keep plaguing us. The commenter (and I) know that isn't true, but sometimes it sure feels as if it were true.)
Fascinating.
Rejoiners are going to use the Labour Party to rejoin the EEA/EU the way eurosceptics used the Conservative Party to get Brexit.
Bring them on!
Social Libertarianism not really fitting into a left/right axis? Authoritarian/liberal is a different model than the left/right used for economics?
Sir Graham Brady, chair
Nus Ghani & Will Wragg, vice Chairman
Executive:
Aaron Bell
Miriam Cates
Jo Gideon
Richard Graham
Chris Green
Robert Halfon
Sally-Ann Hart
Andrew Jones
Tom Randall
David Simmonds
John Stevenson
Martin Vickers
Who do you see doing this from a pro-European side? The Lib Dems?
We're entering one of the rare periods when normal people pay attention to politics, but I don't think we're quite there yet as there are still far too many candidates in the race.
If it turns out that the UK's current situation isn't what future UK wants, shouldn't future UK change things?
The SNP wouldn't (or at least wouldn't for any price Labour would be willing to pay).
Actually, History is being quite kind to him - generally competent and kept us out of 'Nam. Puts him higher than most of his successors.
Having said all that, thanks to said Faustian pact, we are now stuck with it. Very little point in talking about rejoin for the next decade; it would be as divisive as Brexit was. We have to learn to live with it and engage in gradual alignment with EU. What should it be called? "Ever closer almost union"?
Until then the polls are largely for those who apply them to the current position but which is not relevant to the dramatic change in narrative coming down the track
But here's why ditching net zero would be scientifically, economically and electorally stupid.
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/suffer-tories-stupid-party-net-zero-1735395
God. My emoji looks sexy in that hat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary
From a narrative point of view, Lib Dems' Europe policy hasn't really been hitting the headlines lately and I doubt they'll go in as strong on the issue as they did in 2019.
So no, I don't think either of those parties will be doing the pro-EU UKIP equivalent. Which probably means Labour is safe to sit where it's just placed itself. Unfortunately.
Just how 'unconservative' was the Chinese Communist Party's Lockdown policy? How 'unconservative' was furlough? How 'unconservative' was billions frittered away on fraud and wastage as Sunak tried to please SAGE and the unions.
Listening to Sunak's bullsh8t, you'd think he was just coming into government after a Corbyn administration had been deposed from office after running out of money and going to the IMF
This was his doing. He presided over this.
I still hope he loses at the next election.
The 1870's.