Sunak has the most MPs and traditionally the way that it would work is that those he doesn’t need to get into the member vote will back whoever of the others he is most likely to beat. That isn’t Truss or Mordaunt.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Isn't it a listed building? Could be turned into a super hotel. Get 10 minutes at the dispatch box to spout whatever bollocks you like. Nowhere else could offer that opportunity.
I can see Malmaison making a bid for it like Oxford Prison.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Because it is a major historic landmark. It is iconic and an important part of our national heritage.
The idea of it being allowed to slowly disintegrate or even be demolished would be cultural vandalism
The betting markets seem to not be taking into account Sunak's weakness with the electorate that matters. And that is puzzling
Yes, having seen that ConHome poll I am much less certain of Sunak than I was 20 minutes ago
Tory members don’t want him as leader, not sure how he gets around that, unless he can herd the cats of the Tory parliamentary party into giving him a patsy opponent like Hunt
And there won’t be a coronation. The party is too divided and embittered for that
I don't see Sunak as a viable leader.
There is no gravitas. There is no depth. There is no broad policy agenda.
And I know it is trivial, but he is just too shiny. It gives him an artificial plastic appearance that makes him too much of an estate agent or car salesman.
Just can't take to him.
Likewise. He’s tolerable and pleasantly articulate but there’s no spark
Like others I’ve been looking at Badenoch for the first time and Yes, wow, she has that *something*, for sure
Which is encouraging. There is ample talent in the lower ranks, coming through - promoted by Boris, let it be said
Badenoch is the next-leader-but-one?
Or sadly, ten or more years in a shadow cabinet until becoming “the future once”.
This is a key moment for the conservatives and UK politics right here - if leaving office soon they need to leave as a party with better economy management and Brexit management ratings or else it will return to haunt them, regardless how good they may be as individuals.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Isn't it a listed building? Could be turned into a super hotel. Get 10 minutes at the dispatch box to spout whatever bollocks you like. Nowhere else could offer that opportunity.
I can see Malmaison making a bid for it like Oxford Prison.
My parents stayed in Oxford Prison once, said it was quite the surreal experience.
Sunak has the most MPs and traditionally the way that it would work is that those he doesn’t need to get into the member vote will back whoever of the others he is most likely to beat. That isn’t Truss or Mordaunt.
But for that you need OODLES of MPs. He hasn’t got that
The Suella backers are confusing me. The sort of things she’s saying are similar to Kemi. But Kemi is at least ten times more articulate and I’m sorry to say, much cleverer.
I am intrigued if the bloke who is supposed to be his brother and got deported for criminality is actually his brother at all. From Mo's story, it sounds like it was trafficked alone, so I guess the answer is no.
WATO is going to do a segment on it. Would have been massive if we weren't focused on Tory shenanigans.
It sounds like he might also be a few years older than his official age, which would make his kicking ass in the Olympics even more impressive.
I remember thinking he looked in his early 30s during the London Olympics.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Because it is a major historic landmark. It is iconic and an important part of our national heritage.
The idea of it being allowed to slowly disintegrate or even be demolished would be cultural vandalism
Exactly, it's a world heritage site and icon.
Occupying the site while its repaired is dumb, and outside London makes no real sense (it would be more than a gimmick)
The basic issue is it will be unpopular to spend the money so they keep refusing to make a decision, which means itll cost more. Or burn down.
Suggestions for (temporary?) location of parliament: 1. Virtual. All members link in from their constituencies. 2. Stoke. There is a large area ripe for redevelopment but including some pretty spacious and useful 19th century buildings within short walking distance of station. Trains to London take less than an hour and a half plus good connections to rest of Britain. You can reach four airports with an hour.
I am intrigued if the bloke who is supposed to be his brother and got deported for criminality is actually his brother at all. From Mo's story, it sounds like it was trafficked alone, so I guess the answer is no.
WATO is going to do a segment on it. Would have been massive if we weren't focused on Tory shenanigans.
It sounds like he might also be a few years older than his official age, which would make his kicking ass in the Olympics even more impressive.
Quite the story.
There’s a lot going on in the world at the moment, which is mostly being ignored:
Tide turning in Ukraine, thanks to the NATO MLRS weapons. Another general killed and a massive bomb store blown up. Uber being the sh!ttiest company ever, in ways even more sh!tty that we might ever have thought posible. Revolution in Sri Lanka
I don't see the tide turning in Ukr yet.
They still only have up to a dozen active HIMARs / M270 (HIMARs on tracks). The need more like 60-80.
For my money Germany needs to donate some of the 114 M270 they have in storage. Would also help rehabilitate Germany. UK only has about 40, and we have already donated a (very) small number.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The Suella backers are confusing me. The sort of things she’s saying are similar to Kemi. But Kemi is at least ten times more articulate and I’m sorry to say, much cleverer.
Surely you have to switch horses?
That makes the Patel backers even more difficult to understand....??
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Isn't it a listed building? Could be turned into a super hotel. Get 10 minutes at the dispatch box to spout whatever bollocks you like. Nowhere else could offer that opportunity.
I can see Malmaison making a bid for it like Oxford Prison.
My parents stayed in Oxford Prison once, said it was quite the surreal experience.
I've stayed there a few times (until Malmaison shifted from being a cheap boutique hotel chain to a tatty and disappointing hotel chain). It is, as you say, very weird. Though I was in "The Governor's House" rather than the 70s Porridge-style cell block.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Isn't it a listed building? Could be turned into a super hotel. Get 10 minutes at the dispatch box to spout whatever bollocks you like. Nowhere else could offer that opportunity.
I am intrigued if the bloke who is supposed to be his brother and got deported for criminality is actually his brother at all. From Mo's story, it sounds like it was trafficked alone, so I guess the answer is no.
WATO is going to do a segment on it. Would have been massive if we weren't focused on Tory shenanigans.
It sounds like he might also be a few years older than his official age, which would make his kicking ass in the Olympics even more impressive.
Quite the story.
There’s a lot going on in the world at the moment, which is mostly being ignored:
Tide turning in Ukraine, thanks to the NATO MLRS weapons. Another general killed and a massive bomb store blown up. Uber being the sh!ttiest company ever, in ways even more sh!tty that we might ever have thought posible. Revolution in Sri Lanka
I don't see the tide turning in Ukr yet.
They still only have up to a dozen active HIMARs / M270 (HIMARs on tracks). The need more like 60-80.
For my money Germany needs to donate some of the 114 M270 they have in storage. Would also help rehabilitate Germany. UK only has about 40, and we have already donated a (very) small number.
I think (hope) you are being a bit pessimistic. Strongly agree that West needs to deliver more ASAP to maximise chance of Russian defeat.
Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
Out of interest the much sighted 30mph kills kids / 20 mph saves them, how many kids are killed as pedestrians on the road each year? I have no idea.
Blanket policies are beloved of bureaucrats and technocrats.
Roads where bikes go faster than cars are really dangerous. There are 20mph hills near me where driving down is quite scary. So much more that drivers have to look out for, and it’s not safe having to spend more time looking in rear view mirrors than on the road in front.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
The choice of re-location should be determined by number and standing of Premier league soccer clubs.
Liverpool then, with the six European Cups.
Manchester with 18 Premier League titles v Liverpool's 1
York, whose team has never lost a premier league game
Took a step towards the premiership just two months ago. I was there!
The Suella backers are confusing me. The sort of things she’s saying are similar to Kemi. But Kemi is at least ten times more articulate and I’m sorry to say, much cleverer.
Surely you have to switch horses?
That makes the Patel backers even more difficult to understand....??
Pretty obvious that 90% of the Patel and Braverman backers will be supporting Badenoch within days.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
The choice of re-location should be determined by number and standing of Premier league soccer clubs.
Liverpool then, with the six European Cups.
Manchester with 18 Premier League titles v Liverpool's 1
York, whose team has never lost a premier league game
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The question is what benefit is there to moving it? Beyond a PR exercise I dont see why divorcing the political institutions from the capital would achieve.
I'm no fan of London, but the floating of this idea seems pointless and a distraction from when and how theyll fix up the damn building.
I wouldn’t be surprised if after this election there are calls to ban the Tory membership from a role in the process. Particularly when they are in Govt. We’re going to end up with somebody with no serious Govt or political experience on the basis of not being somebody else and or saying things people like.
There’s a reason people don’t usually get catapulted into the top jobs and ideally have a range of roles in Govt beforehand. It should actually give them a real world view of what can and can’t be delivered, and the difficulties of doing so.
Furthermore a new leader can’t just take a “mandate” from the party as replacing the mandate given to the Conservatives by a General Election. They can bring a new focus to non policy related issues (honesty, integrity etc etc) but broadly the policy direction is set absent a new election.
Sunak's campaign must know he's going to struggle to win a members' vote against anyone other than Hunt or Tugendhat. Their strategy therefore may be to get an overwhelming number of votes from MPs in order to pressurise the person in second place to stand down. Unlikely to happen.
Yes, probably the plan. Hence the likely appearance of Gavin WIlliamson on the scene.
Problem is that the 1922 Committee seems quite determined to go with a members' vote. Plus he has not got the numbers I suspect to be so overwhelming.
Nicola Sturgeon’s request for the UK’s highest court to give her clarity on the legality of her planned Scottish independence referendum should be rejected, the UK Government has said.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
Sunak has the most MPs and traditionally the way that it would work is that those he doesn’t need to get into the member vote will back whoever of the others he is most likely to beat. That isn’t Truss or Mordaunt.
So who would that be? Tugendhat? Hunt?
It relies on Rishi being able to engineer such a candidate into the last 3 and then lend a number of votes to that candidate. I’m not sure he has the sheer number of votes to be able to do so.
The betting markets seem to not be taking into account Sunak's weakness with the electorate that matters. And that is puzzling
Yes, having seen that ConHome poll I am much less certain of Sunak than I was 20 minutes ago
Tory members don’t want him as leader, not sure how he gets around that, unless he can herd the cats of the Tory parliamentary party into giving him a patsy opponent like Hunt
And there won’t be a coronation. The party is too divided and embittered for that
But for me, if it’s Penny or Sunak in last 2 I can at least relax as it doesn’t matter either wins.
At the moment with it near certain to be Truss I am 🤢
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
The choice of re-location should be determined by number and standing of Premier league soccer clubs.
Liverpool then, with the six European Cups.
Manchester with 18 Premier League titles v Liverpool's 1
York, whose team has never lost a premier league game
Took a step towards the premiership just two months ago. I was there!
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Nicola Sturgeon’s request for the UK’s highest court to give her clarity on the legality of her planned Scottish independence referendum should be rejected, the UK Government has said.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Because it is a major historic landmark. It is iconic and an important part of our national heritage.
The idea of it being allowed to slowly disintegrate or even be demolished would be cultural vandalism
As Andrea Leadsome said in a recent article about the refurb (and she is in charge of it) “the Houses of Parliament is one of the most famous buildings in the world, like the Taj Mahal, it is also a World Heritage site, it belongs to humanity, but it is our job to look after it, however awkward”
Hard to argue with that
If you compile a list of the ten most iconic, instantly recognisable buildings in the world Westminster is on there
Rough list:
Pyramids Parthenon Tower of Pisa Taj Mahal Empire State Bldg Eiffel Tower Palace of Westminster Sydney Opera House Burj
Number ten can be disputed between Stonehenge, Statue of Liberty, The Pantheon, Hagia Sophia, Gobekli Tepe (should be top of the top ten really), Notre Dame, St Basil’s Cathedral, et al, depending on your definition of “building”
If MPs cannot stomach paying to refurbish parliament as it will always be unpopular they need to stop fading about and just decide they won't, not debate it any more, as it's going nowhere.
I think Leadsom of all people spoke sense about it
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The question is what benefit is there to moving it? Beyond a PR exercise I dont see why divorcing the political institutions from the capital would achieve.
I'm no fan of London, but the floating of this idea seems pointless and a distraction from when and how theyll fix up the damn building.
They really need to bite the bullet and move out. At least temporarily. That needs a plan. So they won't.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Nicola Sturgeon’s request for the UK’s highest court to give her clarity on the legality of her planned Scottish independence referendum should be rejected, the UK Government has said.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
Its not just the 20mph, its the blanket nature of the policy. Absolutely no need for it to be 20mph at 3am...the argument about runners or kids, there isn't any at that time.
The US system of having 30mph, then at certain times e.g. school times, its 20mph seems a perfectly sensible comprise.
Out of interest the much sighted 30mph kills kids / 20 mph saves them, how many kids are killed as pedestrians on the road each year? I have no idea.
Blanket policies are beloved of bureaucrats and technocrats.
Roads where bikes go faster than cars are really dangerous. There are 20mph hills near me where driving down is quite scary. So much more that drivers have to look out for, and it’s not safe having to spend more time looking in rear view mirrors than on the road in front.
If you're having trouble keeping an eye on everything to the extent you're causing a danger to other road users, you should probably hand your license in (or slow down).
In my experience most of the danger comes from close passes (which don't happen in 20 mph zones cos drivers aren't as frustrated), and people not seeing you at junctions (so I sit in the middle of lane to give me more time to swerve).
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The question is what benefit is there to moving it? Beyond a PR exercise I dont see why divorcing the political institutions from the capital would achieve.
Well it would be cheaper. And civil servants would be able to afford houses. Which would widen the potential talent pool for workers in government. And on the grounds that people need to get to the capital, it's more normal for the capital to be somewhere central, rather than tucked away right down in the bottom corner. So it would benefit people who needed to get there. And it would give a wider perspective to government. You still sometimes meet civil servants who see anything outside the south east as rather strange and exotic. That would be a benefit.
And it would be a big regeneration boost for whichever bit of land was chosen, while realising the asset of valuable central London land.
I don't know whether it would outweigh the disbenefits. But I can see good reasons to do so.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Despite the disclaimer about not voting Tory, Kemi Badenoch's style of politics could win over a lot of left-leaning women. She could be another Heineken leader who reaches the parts others can't.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
The Suella backers are confusing me. The sort of things she’s saying are similar to Kemi. But Kemi is at least ten times more articulate and I’m sorry to say, much cleverer.
Surely you have to switch horses?
Suella was quicker out of the blocks, and she is slightly more recognisable. Kemi's momentum will have surprised many. And you do run the risk of looking a bit of a dick if you switch horses in midstream like this. Unless you have to switch, stay where you are and just switch in the second round.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Top 5 include London, New York, Paris. Where else
Tokyo i reckon, but that’s 4th or 5th, and I’d say Shanghai
It has the absolute swagger of a world city, if you go there. A muscle memory of greatness now returning. The commercial, business and cultural capital of China, the new superpower
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Nicola Sturgeon’s request for the UK’s highest court to give her clarity on the legality of her planned Scottish independence referendum should be rejected, the UK Government has said.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Thanks for rescuing my comment from the old thread graveyard. I do think it extraordinary that the Tories' main offer to Red Wall voters seems to be getting jettisoned. Seems a risky strategy, and also pretty dishonest.
Despite the bollocks they've spouted as regards the "Red Wall", there's a vanishingly small percentage of their members living there. Most have probably never even been there.
Do you have the numbers?
Here are the numbers pre-last election ie September 2019. It seems reasonable to suggest that Red Wall members have increased since then.
Average age for UK parties at that time: Con 57, Lab 53, SNP 54, LD 52
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
She needs to put herself through a Emma Barnett or Andrew Neil interview “why did you hack the deputy primeministers web site” “have you hacked any other websites” type question next though, to cement her freshly won credentials. If I were her spin girl I would be onto the bookers right now.
Sunak's campaign must know he's going to struggle to win a members' vote against anyone other than Hunt or Tugendhat. Their strategy therefore may be to get an overwhelming number of votes from MPs in order to pressurise the person in second place to stand down. Unlikely to happen.
Whoever is second to Rish with MPs will definitely go on to the members vote as they'll have nothing to lose (either they'll become a "surprise" Prime Minister" if Rishi wilts or they'll have a couple of months exposure and a great chance when Con eventually eviscerate Rishi at some point in the future (as they inevitably will... )
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Despite the disclaimer about not voting Tory, Kemi Badenoch's style of politics could win over a lot of left-leaning women. She could be another Heineken leader who reaches the parts others can't.
Yes; like Boris, I think she has a bigger upside than the more establishment characters (Rishi, in this case, but also TT and Hunt), but also a bigger downside. She could win a GE, but she could also lose bigly.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The question is what benefit is there to moving it? Beyond a PR exercise I dont see why divorcing the political institutions from the capital would achieve.
Well it would be cheaper. And civil servants would be able to afford houses. Which would widen the potential talent pool for workers in government. And on the grounds that people need to get to the capital, it's more normal for the capital to be somewhere central, rather than tucked away right down in the bottom corner. So it would benefit people who needed to get there. And it would give a wider perspective to government. You still sometimes meet civil servants who see anything outside the south east as rather strange and exotic. That would be a benefit.
And it would be a big regeneration boost for whichever bit of land was chosen, while realising the asset of valuable central London land.
I don't know whether it would outweigh the disbenefits. But I can see good reasons to do so.
Is it more normal for capitals to be central? I can think of a few which are, but many which are not.
Sunak: The man who single-handedly saved so many people's jobs and stopped the country from falling off the economic cliff. Sane, polished, considered, with a Campbell-esque media team behind him. Perhaps the only candidate who can win the red wall and still offer enough fiscally Conservative policies to hold the base.
Badenoch - Would utterly terrify a Labour Party who would have no idea how to deal with her. Like Sunak she is rational and thinking, and speaks with a gravitas that is above and beyond her actual experience. Represents a very modern relaunch of the Tory Party, someone who frankly could lead a party that puts Labour to the sword in cities and towns where the left put up holier-than-though types as candidates.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Come to think of it. Who are the RCP/Spiked crowd backing?
Royal College of Physicians? Not Hunt, I'd guess.
Brendan O Neill wrote an article today in defence of Rishi. Not sure it was actually backing Rishi, just taking on some of his attackers.
Mmm. For all the talk of continuity Boris, surely his right hand man is the obvious candidate for the role? And yet, it doesn't seem to be being perceived that way at all.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The question is what benefit is there to moving it? Beyond a PR exercise I dont see why divorcing the political institutions from the capital would achieve.
I'm no fan of London, but the floating of this idea seems pointless and a distraction from when and how theyll fix up the damn building.
It's not so much the benefits of moving it (@Cookie has done such a good job there it's not worth saying much) it's the £22bn repair bill.
Now that's more than HS2E was going to cost to pick 1 infrastructure project.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Top 5 include London, New York, Paris. Where else
Tokyo i reckon, but that’s 4th or 5th, and I’d say Shanghai
It has the absolute swagger of a world city, if you go there. A muscle memory of greatness now returning. The commercial, business and cultural capital of China, the new superpower
And manages to do it without being the political capital.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating moving the capital; I'm thinking out loud. It's a fun thought experiment.
The Suella backers are confusing me. The sort of things she’s saying are similar to Kemi. But Kemi is at least ten times more articulate and I’m sorry to say, much cleverer.
Surely you have to switch horses?
Suella was quicker out of the blocks, and she is slightly more recognisable. Kemi's momentum will have surprised many. And you do run the risk of looking a bit of a dick if you switch horses in midstream like this. Unless you have to switch, stay where you are and just switch in the second round.
I agree, some got supporters for being first out the blocks they won’t get in secret ballot now. But then the point for some wasn’t winning, but placing their hands on the greasy pole, getting a feel for it. The more serious challengers launched later.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Because it is a major historic landmark. It is iconic and an important part of our national heritage.
The idea of it being allowed to slowly disintegrate or even be demolished would be cultural vandalism
As Andrea Leadsome said in a recent article about the refurb (and she is in charge of it) “the Houses of Parliament is one of the most famous buildings in the world, like the Taj Mahal, it is also a World Heritage site, it belongs to humanity, but it is our job to look after it, however awkward”
Hard to argue with that
If you compile a list of the ten most iconic, instantly recognisable buildings in the world Westminster is on there
Rough list:
Pyramids Parthenon Tower of Pisa Taj Mahal Empire State Bldg Eiffel Tower Palace of Westminster Sydney Opera House Burj
Number ten can be disputed between Stonehenge, Statue of Liberty, The Pantheon, Hagia Sophia, Gobekli Tepe (should be top of the top ten really), Notre Dame, St Basil’s Cathedral, et al, depending on your definition of “building”
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The question is what benefit is there to moving it? Beyond a PR exercise I dont see why divorcing the political institutions from the capital would achieve.
I'm no fan of London, but the floating of this idea seems pointless and a distraction from when and how theyll fix up the damn building.
It's not so much the benefits of moving it (@Cookie has done such a good job there it's not worth saying much) it's the £22bn repair bill.
Now that's more than HS2E was going to cost to pick 1 infrastructure project.
Then they need to confirm they cannot afford it, not chase fantasy cheaper options.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
We could be at the start of something truly extraordinary here. Imagine the reverberations around the world if KB became the next PM.
If (big IF) Kemi were to win this I do think it will be enough of a change for the Conservatives that it probably resets the dial once again and people will view it as an entirely new government despite Con being in power for 12 years.
A Kemi government would neuter "time for a change" and would likely be a big problem for Labour...
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Nicola Sturgeon’s request for the UK’s highest court to give her clarity on the legality of her planned Scottish independence referendum should be rejected, the UK Government has said.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
What has the UK government got to fear? Let the legal experts clear that one up seems okay, it will likely take them best part of 15 years.
AIUI, the Lord Advocate had not advised SG on legality yet.
Punting it back to SG forces LA to make a judgement which could be challenged in a Scottish court. Much better optics for team UK.
The Lord Advocate has said
"The Lord Advocate needs to have the necessary degree of confidence that a Bill would be within devolved competence in order to 'clear' such a statement.
“In the present case, the Lord Advocate does not have the necessary degree of confidence."
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Thanks for rescuing my comment from the old thread graveyard. I do think it extraordinary that the Tories' main offer to Red Wall voters seems to be getting jettisoned. Seems a risky strategy, and also pretty dishonest.
Despite the bollocks they've spouted as regards the "Red Wall", there's a vanishingly small percentage of their members living there. Most have probably never even been there.
Do you have the numbers?
Here are the numbers pre-last election ie September 2019. It seems reasonable to suggest that Red Wall members have increased since then.
Average age for UK parties at that time: Con 57, Lab 53, SNP 54, LD 52
Those aren't Red Wall figures. They are regional. What proportion of the membership in the NW and Yorkshire lives in already long term super safe seats?
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Come to think of it. Who are the RCP/Spiked crowd backing?
Royal College of Physicians? Not Hunt, I'd guess.
Brendan O Neill wrote an article today in defence of Rishi. Not sure it was actually backing Rishi, just taking on some of his attackers.
Mmm. For all the talk of continuity Boris, surely his right hand man is the obvious candidate for the role? And yet, it doesn't seem to be being perceived that way at all.
Because Boris has been briefing against him for months and is clearly behimd the 'Get Sunak' attacksml.
Nicola Sturgeon’s request for the UK’s highest court to give her clarity on the legality of her planned Scottish independence referendum should be rejected, the UK Government has said.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
What has the UK government got to fear? Let the legal experts clear that one up seems okay, it will likely take them best part of 15 years.
I raised this at the time she said she was doing this. In the case about the UN Convention on the rights of the Child the SC unanimously explained the procedure set out in the Scotland Act. There are a number of sequential safeguards. The first of these is that the bill should be signed off by the law officers. The Lord Advocate has refused to do that. The second is that it is put before the Presiding Officer who is supposed to certify it as competent. This has not been done. Thirdly, the bill is scrutinised by the Scottish Parliament. That may, of course, change its nature. Finally, once there is a determined bill, the matter may be remitted to the SC for a ruling.
Nicola has tried to short circuit this because her own Lord Advocate has reservations as to its competency. That would not be in accordance with the Act. Courts generally refuse to answer hypothetical questions. We do not know what the final version of this bill will look like. I suspect the SC will refuse to give a ruling at this stage.
Assuming he does win the vote (which he won't), how does it actually achieve his aim of getting a new PM more quickly?
In the same way that Callaghan remained as PM after he lost the VONC in 1979, Johnson would remain as PM.
The process to elect a new leader of the Conservative Party is already underway and any general election, the timing of which would still be set by the current administration and so would see a polling date set for later in September.
So nothing in his cunning plan would achieve the result he seeks. Who is advising Starmer???
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
The Palace of Westminster will need to be repaired whether or not it remains the home of Parliament.
A permanent move to another city doesn't take away the need to repair the existing buildings
Why would it need to be repaired if it's no longer home of Parliament.
But the cost of repairing an empty building is X or Y times cheaper than doing repairs when the building is being used.
Because it is a major historic landmark. It is iconic and an important part of our national heritage.
The idea of it being allowed to slowly disintegrate or even be demolished would be cultural vandalism
As Andrea Leadsome said in a recent article about the refurb (and she is in charge of it) “the Houses of Parliament is one of the most famous buildings in the world, like the Taj Mahal, it is also a World Heritage site, it belongs to humanity, but it is our job to look after it, however awkward”
Hard to argue with that
If you compile a list of the ten most iconic, instantly recognisable buildings in the world Westminster is on there
Rough list:
Pyramids Parthenon Tower of Pisa Taj Mahal Empire State Bldg Eiffel Tower Palace of Westminster Sydney Opera House Burj
Number ten can be disputed between Stonehenge, Statue of Liberty, The Pantheon, Hagia Sophia, Gobekli Tepe (should be top of the top ten really), Notre Dame, St Basil’s Cathedral, et al, depending on your definition of “building”
Sunak: The man who single-handedly saved so many people's jobs and stopped the country from falling off the economic cliff. Sane, polished, considered, with a Campbell-esque media team behind him. Perhaps the only candidate who can win the red wall and still offer enough fiscally Conservative policies to hold the base.
Badenoch - Would utterly terrify a Labour Party who would have no idea how to deal with her. Like Sunak she is rational and thinking, and speaks with a gravitas that is above and beyond her actual experience. Represents a very modern relaunch of the Tory Party, someone who frankly could lead a party that puts Labour to the sword in cities and towns where the left put up holier-than-though types as candidates.
Just a shame Rishi Rich was trying to dodge paying tax (well his wife was) while taxing the crap out of everyone else. That has really cut through with the public and done a LOT of damage to his reputation (rightfully so)
Assuming he does win the vote (which he won't), how does it actually achieve his aim of getting a new PM more quickly?
In the same way that Callaghan remained as PM after he lost the VONC in 1979, Johnson would remain as PM.
The process to elect a new leader of the Conservative Party is already underway and any general election, the timing of which would still be set by the current administration and so would see a polling date set for later in September.
So nothing in his cunning plan would achieve the result he seeks. Who is advising Starmer???
He wants all the Tories who so openly and publicly blew up Johnson to give him their confidence. That's all. Will look great on a leaflet apparently.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Assuming he does win the vote (which he won't), how does it actually achieve his aim of getting a new PM more quickly?
In the same way that Callaghan remained as PM after he lost the VONC in 1979, Johnson would remain as PM.
The process to elect a new leader of the Conservative Party is already underway and any general election, the timing of which would still be set by the current administration and so would see a polling date set for later in September.
So nothing in his cunning plan would achieve the result he seeks. Who is advising Starmer???
He wants all the Tories who so openly and publicly blew up Johnson to give him their confidence. That's all. Will look great on a leaflet apparently.
They wouldn't be. They would be giving confidence to the governing party.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Top 5 include London, New York, Paris. Where else
Tokyo i reckon, but that’s 4th or 5th, and I’d say Shanghai
It has the absolute swagger of a world city, if you go there. A muscle memory of greatness now returning. The commercial, business and cultural capital of China, the new superpower
And manages to do it without being the political capital.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating moving the capital; I'm thinking out loud. It's a fun thought experiment.
Moving parliament out of London is a total non-starter. Given how our transport networks are built radiating out from the capital, the net increase in transport time from the average constituency would be prohibitive. The only potential alternative is Birmingham, but that is so close to London as to raise the question of why bother. Of course Parliament could be moved permanently out of the Palace of Westminster if that was a lower cost solution than refurbishing the building as a working parliamentary building. Even with the cost of building a new parliament that might be the case.
Assuming he does win the vote (which he won't), how does it actually achieve his aim of getting a new PM more quickly?
In the same way that Callaghan remained as PM after he lost the VONC in 1979, Johnson would remain as PM.
The process to elect a new leader of the Conservative Party is already underway and any general election, the timing of which would still be set by the current administration and so would see a polling date set for later in September.
So nothing in his cunning plan would achieve the result he seeks. Who is advising Starmer???
Do you honestly think he has any expectations of winning the vote? At all? Or of replacing the government?
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Indeed. This mad narrative is in danger of becoming yet another entry in the inglorious series Things That PB Predicts That Never Happen.
And yet Sydney, New York, Munich, St. Petersburg, Milan, Barcelona, Rio...
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
The question is what benefit is there to moving it? Beyond a PR exercise I dont see why divorcing the political institutions from the capital would achieve.
I'm no fan of London, but the floating of this idea seems pointless and a distraction from when and how theyll fix up the damn building.
It's not so much the benefits of moving it (@Cookie has done such a good job there it's not worth saying much) it's the £22bn repair bill.
Now that's more than HS2E was going to cost to pick 1 infrastructure project.
Then they need to confirm they cannot afford it, not chase fantasy cheaper options.
So you are happy to spend £22bn refurbishing an historic building that isn't fit for (modern) purposes?
One reason for pushing a different solution is that it may force someone to make an actual decision and commit to spending the money required to refurbish the place because if they don't do it soon it will fall down or burn itself down of it's own accord.
After a prolonged hiatus, we finally have a new coalition in Tallinn. The new, three-party government consists of Kaja Kallas´s Reform (Liberal), the Social Democrats and the Conservative Isamaa. Although the populists of Centre and the nationalist populists of EKRE have been excluded, it has come at a price for the Prime Minister. Each party has the same number of ministers, so Reform have lost two ministers. Nevertheless, the government will be strong enough to survive until the elections on March 5th and although Isamaa have driven a hard bargain, the interests of the Kremlin continue to be blunted in Estonia. The new government programme will focus on the cost of living, the integration of Russian language education into the Estonian system, and- of course- defence. The new LNG plant should be online before the winter and the Estonian electrical grid will dephase from the Russian frequency, which may cause peak load problems in the Leningradskaya Oblast/City of St. Petersburg region, but the breakdown of economic links between Russia and the outside world is becoming near total. The rather hollow gloating from the Kemlin merely makes the Estonians shrug. "Who laughs last, laughs loudest", but criticism of Germany, though muted is becoming stronger. Berlin is not preparing for the next moves from the Kremlin, it is being said, and the Putinists will launch further economic and other hybrid attacks on EU targets. Incidentally some of the chaos at world airports is being put down to Russian cyber attacks, and significant attacks on the global financial system are apparently underway as well.
The departure of Boris Johnson has been noted without too much regret here, since the asumption is that whoever emerges at the new British Prime Minister is unlikely to rock the NATO boat and it seems a given that support for Ukraine will also continue. The number of UA refugees continues to rise, and there is s certain frustration that more help is not being given by other countries.
The situation in Russia is continuing to deteriorate and trade across the border is at a standstill. There are many Russians who are looking to sit out the war here and there is no doubt that the economic and political outlook for the Russian Federation is increasingly bleak. The news of some Ukrainian success on the battlefield is seen as the beginning of the next phase of the war. Rumours abound of serious problems in the Russian armed forces, but the Estonians are taking no chances. Underground shelters are now prepared in the City of Tallinn and the armed forces remain at a high state of readiness. The continuing arrival of further NATO forces now includes a squadron of USAF F-35s.
As Kaja Kallas lives to fight another day, we get used to the new normal: Preparations to prevent any Russian moves in this direction and hope that the bear does not actually collapse, despite the disaster that they have unleashed upon themselves and on the world.
While there's been much focus on Kemi's views on wokeness and the trans issues, there's been less focus on her promise to abandon net zero, roll back the state, cut education expenditure and so on.
I can see her winning the Tory membership over. I'm less persuaded that abandoning net zero and rolling back the state so drastically will win over the typical floating voter.
Assuming he does win the vote (which he won't), how does it actually achieve his aim of getting a new PM more quickly?
In the same way that Callaghan remained as PM after he lost the VONC in 1979, Johnson would remain as PM.
The process to elect a new leader of the Conservative Party is already underway and any general election, the timing of which would still be set by the current administration and so would see a polling date set for later in September.
So nothing in his cunning plan would achieve the result he seeks. Who is advising Starmer???
No. It adds to the narrative that the Cons are unfit for office. Of course it will unite the (Cons) party etc but in Joe Public's mind there will be an element of wow a vote of no confidence that sounds serious. To add to the ongoing views of the Cons not all positive I have to tell you.
Nicola Sturgeon’s request for the UK’s highest court to give her clarity on the legality of her planned Scottish independence referendum should be rejected, the UK Government has said.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
What has the UK government got to fear? Let the legal experts clear that one up seems okay, it will likely take them best part of 15 years.
I raised this at the time she said she was doing this. In the case about the UN Convention on the rights of the Child the SC unanimously explained the procedure set out in the Scotland Act. There are a number of sequential safeguards. The first of these is that the bill should be signed off by the law officers. The Lord Advocate has refused to do that. The second is that it is put before the Presiding Officer who is supposed to certify it as competent. This has not been done. Thirdly, the bill is scrutinised by the Scottish Parliament. That may, of course, change its nature. Finally, once there is a determined bill, the matter may be remitted to the SC for a ruling.
Nicola has tried to short circuit this because her own Lord Advocate has reservations as to its competency. That would not be in accordance with the Act. Courts generally refuse to answer hypothetical questions. We do not know what the final version of this bill will look like. I suspect the SC will refuse to give a ruling at this stage.
I think I understand know, but please correct me if I havn’t caught up, she is asking the top courts for a sort of blank cheque that gazumps attacks from others, but top courts don’t give blank cheques - you have to abide by a more fuller process to get something in writing from them?
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Assuming he does win the vote (which he won't), how does it actually achieve his aim of getting a new PM more quickly?
In the same way that Callaghan remained as PM after he lost the VONC in 1979, Johnson would remain as PM.
The process to elect a new leader of the Conservative Party is already underway and any general election, the timing of which would still be set by the current administration and so would see a polling date set for later in September.
So nothing in his cunning plan would achieve the result he seeks. Who is advising Starmer???
He wants all the Tories who so openly and publicly blew up Johnson to give him their confidence. That's all. Will look great on a leaflet apparently.
They wouldn't be. They would be giving confidence to the governing party.
Nope. Every leaflet will have the MP and all the quotes where they have supported the crook.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
Come to think of it. Who are the RCP/Spiked crowd backing?
Royal College of Physicians? Not Hunt, I'd guess.
Brendan O Neill wrote an article today in defence of Rishi. Not sure it was actually backing Rishi, just taking on some of his attackers.
Mmm. For all the talk of continuity Boris, surely his right hand man is the obvious candidate for the role? And yet, it doesn't seem to be being perceived that way at all.
Because Boris has been briefing against him for months and is clearly behimd the 'Get Sunak' attacksml.
Well of course. That's cos he's the scapegoat because it can't be Boris' fault of course. But the overall political direction he's outlining is the closest to no change.
None of the leadership contenders seems to be talking about levelling up. Focus seems to be on shrinking the state, which helps London and the SE. Have the Tories given up on the Red Wall, or do they hope that going large on Chicks with Dicks will obscure the abandonment of levelling up as a policy objective?
That isn't going to work when I suspect the Labour manifesto will feature HS2E, NPR and quite possibly given the state of Parliament a plan to move Parliament to Manchester
* Can't really be Birmingham for reasons and as others have pointed out if you move it to a small place it will total dominate the town / city but would leave whole piles of things in London.
Why couldn't it be Birmingham ?
The romantic in me would like Colchester, York or Winchester but none of those will happen.
Too near London especially with HS2 - you would end up with Parliament in Birmingham and most things left where they were.
And the whole point of the change would be to change the focus of the country away from being London centric.
Am I missing something? Since when was it Labour policy to move parliament out of London? It’s a pretty extraordinary move
I didn't say it was policy - but given the state of Parliament it makes sense to firstly have a discussion about it and secondly whether there are votes in it.
And up North knocking London down a peg or 2 is probably worth a fair few votes.
Ah, OK
Phew. I don’t think it will ever happen, nor should it happen; it would be an act of self harm
The UK has one great World City. London. It might be the greatest city on earth, it is easily in the top 5
No other city in the UK is in the top 100 for “greatness”, probably not even Edinburgh (which is exceedingly handsome but too small for greatness)
Taking politics out of London would damage our politics and diminish the city at the same time. Stupid
Top 5 include London, New York, Paris. Where else
Tokyo i reckon, but that’s 4th or 5th, and I’d say Shanghai
It has the absolute swagger of a world city, if you go there. A muscle memory of greatness now returning. The commercial, business and cultural capital of China, the new superpower
And manages to do it without being the political capital.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating moving the capital; I'm thinking out loud. It's a fun thought experiment.
Moving parliament out of London is a total non-starter. Given how our transport networks are built radiating out from the capital, the net increase in transport time from the average constituency would be prohibitive. The only potential alternative is Birmingham, but that is so close to London as to raise the question of why bother. Of course Parliament could be moved permanently out of the Palace of Westminster if that was a lower cost solution than refurbishing the building as a working parliamentary building. Even with the cost of building a new parliament that might be the case.
Really - granted those down South would have a longer journey to Manchester but it would be easier for virtually everyone outside the East and South East.
Julie Bindel @bindelj I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM? @KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
We could be at the start of something truly extraordinary here. Imagine the reverberations around the world if KB became the next PM.
Why would there be reverberations around the world?
If the UK PM met EU leaders and Commissioners it would be decidedly striking…..nasty racist Little Britain…..with the only ethnic minority leader in the whole line up….
Comments
Currently the Government is trying to avoid spending £2bn future proofing the Manchester end of HS2..
This is a key moment for the conservatives and UK politics right here - if leaving office soon they need to leave as a party with better economy management and Brexit management ratings or else it will return to haunt them, regardless how good they may be as individuals.
I think Sunak gets that many.
Surely you have to switch horses?
Occupying the site while its repaired is dumb, and outside London makes no real sense (it would be more than a gimmick)
The basic issue is it will be unpopular to spend the money so they keep refusing to make a decision, which means itll cost more. Or burn down.
I'm spitting mad about their idiocy.
1. Virtual. All members link in from their constituencies.
2. Stoke. There is a large area ripe for redevelopment but including some pretty spacious and useful 19th century buildings within short walking distance of station. Trains to London take less than an hour and a half plus good connections to rest of Britain. You can reach four airports with an hour.
They still only have up to a dozen active HIMARs / M270 (HIMARs on tracks). The need more like 60-80.
For my money Germany needs to donate some of the 114 M270 they have in storage. Would also help rehabilitate Germany. UK only has about 40, and we have already donated a (very) small number.
Will London be noticeably less great without parliament and the civil service?
Are we likely to be looking at an era of defaults?
It has 25 acres of floor space.
Julie Bindel
@bindelj
I would rather give Donald Trump a massage than vote Tory, but if you want to know who I'd back to be the next PM?
@KemiBadenoch all the way. She has her head screwed on. Only real grown up in the room. Save your breath telling me what she believes/has done that you don't like.
https://twitter.com/bindelj/status/1546809950067990528
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_League#Champions
I'm no fan of London, but the floating of this idea seems pointless and a distraction from when and how theyll fix up the damn building.
There’s a reason people don’t usually get catapulted into the top jobs and ideally have a range of roles in Govt beforehand. It should actually give them a real world view of what can and can’t be delivered, and the difficulties of doing so.
Furthermore a new leader can’t just take a “mandate” from the party as replacing the mandate given to the Conservatives by a General Election. They can bring a new focus to non policy related issues (honesty, integrity etc etc) but broadly the policy direction is set absent a new election.
Problem is that the 1922 Committee seems quite determined to go with a members' vote. Plus he has not got the numbers I suspect to be so overwhelming.
In its initial submission to the Supreme Court, which has been asked to decide the issue, its lawyers argue that the case should be thrown out as premature.
They believe that the decision on the legality of the proposed legislation cannot be made until after it is introduced, scrutinised and passed at Holyrood.
https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scottish-independence-uk-government-supreme-court-throw-out-indyref2-case-1737075
It relies on Rishi being able to engineer such a candidate into the last 3 and then lend a number of votes to that candidate. I’m not sure he has the sheer number of votes to be able to do so.
At the moment with it near certain to be Truss I am 🤢
Who are the RCP/Spiked crowd backing?
Hard to argue with that
If you compile a list of the ten most iconic, instantly recognisable buildings in the world Westminster is on there
Rough list:
Pyramids
Parthenon
Tower of Pisa
Taj Mahal
Empire State Bldg
Eiffel Tower
Palace of Westminster
Sydney Opera House
Burj
Number ten can be disputed between Stonehenge, Statue of Liberty, The Pantheon, Hagia Sophia, Gobekli Tepe (should be top of the top ten really), Notre Dame, St Basil’s Cathedral, et al, depending on your definition of “building”
I think Leadsom of all people spoke sense about it
Someone who refuses to abide by the radical new trans orthodoxy stands up for what they believe in.
In my experience most of the danger comes from close passes (which don't happen in 20 mph zones cos drivers aren't as frustrated), and people not seeing you at junctions (so I sit in the middle of lane to give me more time to swerve).
And on the grounds that people need to get to the capital, it's more normal for the capital to be somewhere central, rather than tucked away right down in the bottom corner. So it would benefit people who needed to get there.
And it would give a wider perspective to government. You still sometimes meet civil servants who see anything outside the south east as rather strange and exotic. That would be a benefit.
And it would be a big regeneration boost for whichever bit of land was chosen, while realising the asset of valuable central London land.
I don't know whether it would outweigh the disbenefits. But I can see good reasons to do so.
Unbelievable bowling..
We could be at the start of something truly extraordinary here. Imagine the reverberations around the world if KB became the next PM.
Edit: in all seriousness, what is RCP here?
It has the absolute swagger of a world city, if you go there. A muscle memory of greatness now returning. The commercial, business and cultural capital of China, the new superpower
Punting it back to SG forces LA to make a judgement which could be challenged in a Scottish court. Much better optics for team UK.
Here are the numbers pre-last election ie September 2019. It seems reasonable to suggest that Red Wall members have increased since then.
Average age for UK parties at that time: Con 57, Lab 53, SNP 54, LD 52
Sunak: The man who single-handedly saved so many people's jobs and stopped the country from falling off the economic cliff. Sane, polished, considered, with a Campbell-esque media team behind him. Perhaps the only candidate who can win the red wall and still offer enough fiscally Conservative policies to hold the base.
Badenoch - Would utterly terrify a Labour Party who would have no idea how to deal with her. Like Sunak she is rational and thinking, and speaks with a gravitas that is above and beyond her actual experience. Represents a very modern relaunch of the Tory Party, someone who frankly could lead a party that puts Labour to the sword in cities and towns where the left put up holier-than-though types as candidates.
For all the talk of continuity Boris, surely his right hand man is the obvious candidate for the role?
And yet, it doesn't seem to be being perceived that way at all.
Now that's more than HS2E was going to cost to pick 1 infrastructure project.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating moving the capital; I'm thinking out loud. It's a fun thought experiment.
Priti Patel is not standing for the Tory leadership
She says she'll be 'listening to cases being put forward by candidates'
She says she trusts that the contest will be 'conducted in a good spirit that brings our party together'
A Kemi government would neuter "time for a change" and would likely be a big problem for Labour...
The Lord Advocate has said
"The Lord Advocate needs to have the necessary degree of confidence that a Bill would be within devolved competence in order to 'clear' such a statement.
“In the present case, the Lord Advocate does not have the necessary degree of confidence."
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/20257692.scottish-independence-lord-advocate-lacks-confidence-referendum-powers/
So the UK govt is saying “get the Lord Advocate to do her job & tell Nicola “no”.
Nicola has tried to short circuit this because her own Lord Advocate has reservations as to its competency. That would not be in accordance with the Act. Courts generally refuse to answer hypothetical questions. We do not know what the final version of this bill will look like. I suspect the SC will refuse to give a ruling at this stage.
Assuming he does win the vote (which he won't), how does it actually achieve his aim of getting a new PM more quickly?
In the same way that Callaghan remained as PM after he lost the VONC in 1979, Johnson would remain as PM.
The process to elect a new leader of the Conservative Party is already underway and any general election, the timing of which would still be set by the current administration and so would see a polling date set for later in September.
So nothing in his cunning plan would achieve the result he seeks. Who is advising Starmer???
Of course Parliament could be moved permanently out of the Palace of Westminster if that was a lower cost solution than refurbishing the building as a working parliamentary building. Even with the cost of building a new parliament that might be the case.
One reason for pushing a different solution is that it may force someone to make an actual decision and commit to spending the money required to refurbish the place because if they don't do it soon it will fall down or burn itself down of it's own accord.
The departure of Boris Johnson has been noted without too much regret here, since the asumption is that whoever emerges at the new British Prime Minister is unlikely to rock the NATO boat and it seems a given that support for Ukraine will also continue. The number of UA refugees continues to rise, and there is s certain frustration that more help is not being given by other countries.
The situation in Russia is continuing to deteriorate and trade across the border is at a standstill. There are many Russians who are looking to sit out the war here and there is no doubt that the economic and political outlook for the Russian Federation is increasingly bleak. The news of some Ukrainian success on the battlefield is seen as the beginning of the next phase of the war. Rumours abound of serious problems in the Russian armed forces, but the Estonians are taking no chances. Underground shelters are now prepared in the City of Tallinn and the armed forces remain at a high state of readiness. The continuing arrival of further NATO forces now includes a squadron of USAF F-35s.
As Kaja Kallas lives to fight another day, we get used to the new normal: Preparations to prevent any Russian moves in this direction and hope that the bear does not actually collapse, despite the disaster that they have unleashed upon themselves and on the world.
I can see her winning the Tory membership over. I'm less persuaded that abandoning net zero and rolling back the state so drastically will win over the typical floating voter.
How many other lucid, charismatic and courageous young black female conservative world leaders do you know?
But the overall political direction he's outlining is the closest to no change.