Oh, holy shit, the CHIPS bill got passed before Manchin announced his flip on the reconciliation bill.
That is West Wing level fantasy politics shit.
Why is that such a shock? Genuine question.
McConnell refused to pass the CHIPS+ legislation while the reconciliation bill was live, Manchin (and Sinema, we'll get back to that in a bit) convinced McConnell that reconciliation was dead. Biden and Schumer have spent months wailing and gnashing teeth about what a big meanio Manchin has been A couple of hours after passing CHIPS+ Manchin and Schumer host a joint statement that reconciliation is still on baby with most of the good stuff in it.
All on the anniversary of John McCain sinking Trump/McConnell's attempt at repealing Obamacare.
Of course Sinema can still sink this but as far as I know she's never been the sole Dem to vote against something in the Senate.
So basically, McConnell has been played for a sucker?
Good morning everybody; quite bright and cheerful here this morning!
Off topic I admit but can anyone explain to me why the BBCNews has gone "Over the top" with regard to the women's football? Entertaining I grant you but why is it so often top of the bill?
Football innit. Wee loons in the park. Jumpers for goalpoasts.
its about the only football they have the rights to show live... Plus its a good thing to see such positive sporting role models for girls and women everywhere. If you believe, as I do, that more sport is always better for society, then getting young girls interested in playing sport can only be good.
Whilst the hype is irritating in relation to the quality of the football I do think it’s good for girls to have sporting role models and football probably more accessible than athletics, gymnastics, swimming etc.
I found myself agreeing with Janet Street-Porter that the womens football team are preferable role models to the love island girls competing for the nations affections.
Womens football would probably do well to avoid trying to push for money like the mens game as they can occupy a market position where it’s cheap for families to go (as it is currently) - if they start pushing for pay equality then they have to generate the funds for that which will push up ticket prices and scare away an audience. At present each WSL team is subsidised by their Premier League Team by a few million a year and if that increases the PL owners will want to claw it back.
If just one tenth of this story is accurate, then it's so deeply shocking on a number of levels that a very large number of social workers need to be facing criminal charges.
Cumbria County Council is being abolished next year. It seems to me that's a good time to hit total reset on their social services by hiring new ones only from outside.
Its shocking, but there will be another side to the story.
Good morning everybody; quite bright and cheerful here this morning!
Off topic I admit but can anyone explain to me why the BBCNews has gone "Over the top" with regard to the women's football? Entertaining I grant you but why is it so often top of the bill?
Women's football is all the BBC has been able to afford. It's not bigging up women's sport. It's bigging up their incredibly threadbare sports offering. Which I find very cynical.
A view shared by a good few in BBC sports.
Yet the BBC have spent x million on Champions league highlights..
Good morning everybody; quite bright and cheerful here this morning!
Off topic I admit but can anyone explain to me why the BBCNews has gone "Over the top" with regard to the women's football? Entertaining I grant you but why is it so often top of the bill?
Because sport has become, over the last few decades, a social and political issue. It should not of course, but we even have a Minister for it (Nadine I think, who is also - this is Boris's sense of humour, culture minister).
Instead of being a matter of personal interest, private choice and local news sport has come to occupy a place in commerce (lots of private and public cash); society (it has become cultural glue at local, national and international level); and the direction of people's lives (loyalty can be at ludicrous and fanatical levels without any sense of irony).
Also it is a useful vehicle for those who wish to compel others to have particular opinions.
So how astonished we are to discover that it is awash with money, corruption, drugs and politics.
NB I am a recent convert to the merits of women's football. But what could possibly go wrong.....?
Good morning everybody; quite bright and cheerful here this morning!
Off topic I admit but can anyone explain to me why the BBCNews has gone "Over the top" with regard to the women's football? Entertaining I grant you but why is it so often top of the bill?
Football innit. Wee loons in the park. Jumpers for goalpoasts.
its about the only football they have the rights to show live... Plus its a good thing to see such positive sporting role models for girls and women everywhere. If you believe, as I do, that more sport is always better for society, then getting young girls interested in playing sport can only be good.
Whilst the hype is irritating in relation to the quality of the football I do think it’s good for girls to have sporting role models and football probably more accessible than athletics, gymnastics, swimming etc.
I found myself agreeing with Janet Street-Porter that the womens football team are preferable role models to the love island girls competing for the nations affections.
Womens football would probably do well to avoid trying to push for money like the mens game as they can occupy a market position where it’s cheap for families to go (as it is currently) - if they start pushing for pay equality then they have to generate the funds for that which will push up ticket prices and scare away an audience. At present each WSL team is subsidised by their Premier League Team by a few million a year and if that increases the PL owners will want to claw it back.
If just one tenth of this story is accurate, then it's so deeply shocking on a number of levels that a very large number of social workers need to be facing criminal charges.
Cumbria County Council is being abolished next year. It seems to me that's a good time to hit total reset on their social services by hiring new ones only from outside.
Its shocking, but there will be another side to the story.
The best other side to the story is that the birth mother is lying about not receiving the paperwork. Which is eminently possible.
The difficulty in believing that is it's clear the paperwork and due diligence was not done on the prospective adoptive mother. Which leaves CSS with a credibility gap.
And the issue is whether the paperwork is done or not a child was taken from an environment where he would have been closely monitored by a number of agencies for his own safety and placed in an environment where he was murdered without anyone noticing anything was wrong.
However I write that, that's a disaster and one for which negligence laws would seem to apply.
I wonder if the Government (Truss) may need to temporarily effectively nationalise the gas supply.
If she does I expect it to command broad public support.
The free market works brilliantly at efficiently allocating resources and stimulating production and distribution, competitively, in normal times but if we get to the stage where we have a highly constrained supply and it costs households over £500 a month then we'll be in a bidding war where the wealthiest will be able to carry on as normal, at a very high cost, whilst a lot of ordinary people freeze.
That can't be allowed to happen.
Won't BR be along shortly to say thats exactly what should happen?
You are right to highlight what looks like it is going to be a very serious crisis this winter. Under Johnson the Tories big problem was that the demonstrated they didn't believe there was a problem, and that they didn't care if people were struggling. If Truss can change even the latter its a step forward for them.
I don't use gas so I have no idea how they would ration supplies. If prices are going to be as insane as suggested then it may not be rationing by supply that happens but rationing by price.
Quite simply we need to do what some other governments do. Impose a subsidised tariff on the energy companies. Even if that is only for the bottom 20% of household incomes it would make a huge difference. Will cost the government money, but so will the riots and deaths that will happen if they don't.
The simplest thing the government can do to ensure that rationing by price does not hit the poorest extra hard is to abolish the daily standing charge. My daily standing charge is 88.83p, or £6.22 a week, or £27.02 a month, which is 8.1% of Universal Credit in return for nothing.
As a temporary thing, or permanent? Do they make the energy companies swallow the lost revenue, or do they pay for it?
Good morning everybody; quite bright and cheerful here this morning!
Off topic I admit but can anyone explain to me why the BBCNews has gone "Over the top" with regard to the women's football? Entertaining I grant you but why is it so often top of the bill?
They’re not expecting much racist abuse when we lose on penalties
Incidentally, the BMA (usually a supine bunch of management lackeys) have moved quite quickly, with a policy of refusing extracontractual overtime, except at rates significantly higher than on offer from most Trusts, starting immediately. They seem to be growing a spine.
I wonder if the wider public will be very sympathetic?
They’ll get about as much sympathy as the barristers.
Top tier greedy: Doctors and Train drivers Steady as she goes: Teachers & nurses Need a pay rise: Criminal barristers doing legal aid work, ancilliary staff
If just one tenth of this story is accurate, then it's so deeply shocking on a number of levels that a very large number of social workers need to be facing criminal charges.
Cumbria County Council is being abolished next year. It seems to me that's a good time to hit total reset on their social services by hiring new ones only from outside.
Its shocking, but there will be another side to the story.
The best other side to the story is that the birth mother is lying about not receiving the paperwork. Which is eminently possible.
The difficulty in believing that is it's clear the paperwork and due diligence was not done on the prospective adoptive mother. Which leaves CSS with a credibility gap.
And the issue is whether the paperwork is done or not a child was taken from an environment where they would have been closely monitored by a number of agencies for his own safety and placed in an environment where he was murdered without anyone noticing anything was wrong.
However I write that, that's a disaster and one for which negligence laws would seem to apply.
Yes - I would not be convinced of the absolute honesty of the mother without other evidence. That said the care service absolutely needs to have documented evertything they claim to have done.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
If they want bigger crowds, make the tickets cheaper.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
If they want bigger crowds, make the tickets cheaper.
Oh, holy shit, the CHIPS bill got passed before Manchin announced his flip on the reconciliation bill.
That is West Wing level fantasy politics shit.
Why is that such a shock? Genuine question.
McConnell refused to pass the CHIPS+ legislation while the reconciliation bill was live, Manchin (and Sinema, we'll get back to that in a bit) convinced McConnell that reconciliation was dead. Biden and Schumer have spent months wailing and gnashing teeth about what a big meanio Manchin has been A couple of hours after passing CHIPS+ Manchin and Schumer host a joint statement that reconciliation is still on baby with most of the good stuff in it.
All on the anniversary of John McCain sinking Trump/McConnell's attempt at repealing Obamacare.
Of course Sinema can still sink this but as far as I know she's never been the sole Dem to vote against something in the Senate.
So basically, McConnell has been played for a sucker?
I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you.
GOP tears on Twitter at the moment are currently rated as "delicious" by Dem activists.
Sinema could still blow this up but it would be an astounding act of self harm that would probably lead to a successful primary challenge if she did so in my inexpert view.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Free market is also why its reasonable to pay professional male footballers more then professional women. When Man Utd ladies are playing in front of 60.000 fans week in, week out, who are paying 50 quid each to get in, and Sky have outbid Amazon for the rights to show the live games, thats when the pay will equalise.
I wonder if the Government (Truss) may need to temporarily effectively nationalise the gas supply.
If she does I expect it to command broad public support.
The free market works brilliantly at efficiently allocating resources and stimulating production and distribution, competitively, in normal times but if we get to the stage where we have a highly constrained supply and it costs households over £500 a month then we'll be in a bidding war where the wealthiest will be able to carry on as normal, at a very high cost, whilst a lot of ordinary people freeze.
That can't be allowed to happen.
Won't BR be along shortly to say thats exactly what should happen?
You are right to highlight what looks like it is going to be a very serious crisis this winter. Under Johnson the Tories big problem was that the demonstrated they didn't believe there was a problem, and that they didn't care if people were struggling. If Truss can change even the latter its a step forward for them.
I don't use gas so I have no idea how they would ration supplies. If prices are going to be as insane as suggested then it may not be rationing by supply that happens but rationing by price.
Quite simply we need to do what some other governments do. Impose a subsidised tariff on the energy companies. Even if that is only for the bottom 20% of household incomes it would make a huge difference. Will cost the government money, but so will the riots and deaths that will happen if they don't.
The simplest thing the government can do to ensure that rationing by price does not hit the poorest extra hard is to abolish the daily standing charge. My daily standing charge is 88.83p, or £6.22 a week, or £27.02 a month, which is 8.1% of Universal Credit in return for nothing.
As a temporary thing, or permanent? Do they make the energy companies swallow the lost revenue, or do they pay for it?
I'd make it a permanent change and allow the energy companies to charge a higher unit rate to recoup the revenue. Most poorer customers will necessarily be using less energy than richer customers and so will save money by the change, while richer customers who use the most energy will pay more for the privilege.
At the moment the daily standing charge means that the poorest customers pay more for each kW of energy that they use. That's bonkers.
Incidentally, the BMA (usually a supine bunch of management lackeys) have moved quite quickly, with a policy of refusing extracontractual overtime, except at rates significantly higher than on offer from most Trusts, starting immediately. They seem to be growing a spine.
I wonder if the wider public will be very sympathetic?
They’ll get about as much sympathy as the barristers.
Top tier greedy: Doctors and Train drivers Steady as she goes: Teachers & nurses Need a pay rise: Criminal barristers doing legal aid work, ancilliary staff
If I could have got £200 an hour for overtime, I would have been on an extra £60,000 a year and would have stayed one more year in teaching.
But there would have been two minor drawbacks:
1) I was already sufficiently ill I might not have made it through another year;
2) My trust would have gone bankrupt.
I personally think it's madness to even be considering making doctors and nurses work large amounts of overtime. Tired medics are much less effective ones, and ones who make mistakes.
And when I make a mistake in the classroom through exhaustion, I make a fool of myself and get a bollocking. When doctors and nurses do, people die.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
Indeed, but that’s a different market 😉
And the Venn diagram of possible outcomes has quite a large space where the Tories are the largest party in a NOM. Labour's electoral performance remains disappointing for the midterm, the economic **** is already hitting the fan, they have a mountain to climb and the boundaries are against them.
Starmer has been a huge disappointment. It is becoming more and more obvious that he lacks a plan. He is a technocrat, simply intent on managing the ongoing decline. What a wasted opportunity.
Ed Davey has an open goal here. Can he do one of those fancy back-heelers?
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
If they want bigger crowds, make the tickets cheaper.
If just one tenth of this story is accurate, then it's so deeply shocking on a number of levels that a very large number of social workers need to be facing criminal charges.
Cumbria County Council is being abolished next year. It seems to me that's a good time to hit total reset on their social services by hiring new ones only from outside.
1) Audi alteram partem
2) I want to know loads about the baby's father and how well he took to his responsibilities as a prospective parent and what support he received and gave. There's a bit of silence there.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Aren’t you being a bit picky? I was watching the athletics world championships and a commentator said attendances needed to rise for athletics. If you work in sport X and you’re talking to fans of sport X, then what’s wrong with discussing what sport X needs for it to thrive? No-one is proposing the overthrow of capitalism to achieve those rise. They want attendances to rise within a free market!
I wonder if the Government (Truss) may need to temporarily effectively nationalise the gas supply.
If she does I expect it to command broad public support.
The free market works brilliantly at efficiently allocating resources and stimulating production and distribution, competitively, in normal times but if we get to the stage where we have a highly constrained supply and it costs households over £500 a month then we'll be in a bidding war where the wealthiest will be able to carry on as normal, at a very high cost, whilst a lot of ordinary people freeze.
That can't be allowed to happen.
Won't BR be along shortly to say thats exactly what should happen?
You are right to highlight what looks like it is going to be a very serious crisis this winter. Under Johnson the Tories big problem was that the demonstrated they didn't believe there was a problem, and that they didn't care if people were struggling. If Truss can change even the latter its a step forward for them.
I don't use gas so I have no idea how they would ration supplies. If prices are going to be as insane as suggested then it may not be rationing by supply that happens but rationing by price.
Quite simply we need to do what some other governments do. Impose a subsidised tariff on the energy companies. Even if that is only for the bottom 20% of household incomes it would make a huge difference. Will cost the government money, but so will the riots and deaths that will happen if they don't.
The simplest thing the government can do to ensure that rationing by price does not hit the poorest extra hard is to abolish the daily standing charge. My daily standing charge is 88.83p, or £6.22 a week, or £27.02 a month, which is 8.1% of Universal Credit in return for nothing.
As a temporary thing, or permanent? Do they make the energy companies swallow the lost revenue, or do they pay for it?
I'd make it a permanent change and allow the energy companies to charge a higher unit rate to recoup the revenue. Most poorer customers will necessarily be using less energy than richer customers and so will save money by the change, while richer customers who use the most energy will pay more for the privilege.
At the moment the daily standing charge means that the poorest customers pay more for each kW of energy that they use. That's bonkers.
Some of the costs the companies have are per household and others are per unit of energy, so I can see why they charge on that basis.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Women's sport will have developed when the commentary on it stops being dominated by discussions on its development, but it's simply talked about on its merits.
It's a blight that afflicts much of the commentary on Women's cricket. Instead of the commentators telling me about the line and length being bowled, or the field placing, or what this says about the strategy to take a wicket, they're continually droning on about whether there should be more women's red ball cricket. Talk about the women's cricket that's actually happening!
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
If they want bigger crowds, make the tickets cheaper.
Or give them away. Get people interested.
My daughter went with her Brownies to see a non-England game. I watched the game just to see if I could see her in the crowd (I did) and she was sat with quite a big group of Brownies.
Afterwards she said she loved it and she'd like to go see a women's football game again. It wasn't something she'd ever been interested in before, but this got her interested in it.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
Indeed, but that’s a different market 😉
And the Venn diagram of possible outcomes has quite a large space where the Tories are the largest party in a NOM. Labour's electoral performance remains disappointing for the midterm, the economic **** is already hitting the fan, they have a mountain to climb and the boundaries are against them.
Starmer has been a huge disappointment. It is becoming more and more obvious that he lacks a plan. He is a technocrat, simply intent on managing the ongoing decline. What a wasted opportunity.
Ed Davey has an open goal here. Can he do one of those fancy back-heelers?
If just one tenth of this story is accurate, then it's so deeply shocking on a number of levels that a very large number of social workers need to be facing criminal charges.
Cumbria County Council is being abolished next year. It seems to me that's a good time to hit total reset on their social services by hiring new ones only from outside.
Its shocking, but there will be another side to the story.
The best other side to the story is that the birth mother is lying about not receiving the paperwork. Which is eminently possible.
The difficulty in believing that is it's clear the paperwork and due diligence was not done on the prospective adoptive mother. Which leaves CSS with a credibility gap.
And the issue is whether the paperwork is done or not a child was taken from an environment where they would have been closely monitored by a number of agencies for his own safety and placed in an environment where he was murdered without anyone noticing anything was wrong.
However I write that, that's a disaster and one for which negligence laws would seem to apply.
Yes - I would not be convinced of the absolute honesty of the mother without other evidence. That said the care service absolutely needs to have documented evertything they claim to have done.
Whether they have documented it or not, they clearly haven't carried out minimum procedures. There can't have been a welfare check, or they would have picked up the child was being beaten. There can't have been proper scrutiny of the past of the foster parents, as this appears to have not been the first time there were concerns. Visits can't have been carried out - and Covid or no Covid, they needed to be carried out - to see that all was in order. This was only picked up at the trial, which is a leetle too late.
Now, the birth mother may be lying from start to finish. But at the same time, that's almost irrelevant. I think one or two people are looking at the sob story from the mother and overlooking the real story that the BBC should have gone for - the social services should face charges of neglect under the Children Act 2004.
Incidentally, the BMA (usually a supine bunch of management lackeys) have moved quite quickly, with a policy of refusing extracontractual overtime, except at rates significantly higher than on offer from most Trusts, starting immediately. They seem to be growing a spine.
I wonder if the wider public will be very sympathetic?
They’ll get about as much sympathy as the barristers.
Top tier greedy: Doctors and Train drivers Steady as she goes: Teachers & nurses Need a pay rise: Criminal barristers doing legal aid work, ancilliary staff
If I could have got £200 an hour for overtime, I would have been on an extra £60,000 a year and would have stayed one more year in teaching.
But there would have been two minor drawbacks:
1) I was already sufficiently ill I might not have made it through another year;
2) My trust would have gone bankrupt.
I personally think it's madness to even be considering making doctors and nurses work large amounts of overtime. Tired medics are much less effective ones, and ones who make mistakes.
And when I make a mistake in the classroom through exhaustion, I make a fool of myself and get a bollocking. When doctors and nurses do, people die.
It's great that the womens' footie is getting all the airtime for the reasons put forward by several posters. It is tempting to see the BBC's promotion of it as woke but as @MM said it's far more likely to be commercially-driven.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
Incidentally, the BMA (usually a supine bunch of management lackeys) have moved quite quickly, with a policy of refusing extracontractual overtime, except at rates significantly higher than on offer from most Trusts, starting immediately. They seem to be growing a spine.
I wonder if the wider public will be very sympathetic?
They’ll get about as much sympathy as the barristers.
Top tier greedy: Doctors and Train drivers Steady as she goes: Teachers & nurses Need a pay rise: Criminal barristers doing legal aid work, ancilliary staff
If I could have got £200 an hour for overtime, I would have been on an extra £60,000 a year and would have stayed one more year in teaching.
But there would have been two minor drawbacks:
1) I was already sufficiently ill I might not have made it through another year;
2) My trust would have gone bankrupt.
I personally think it's madness to even be considering making doctors and nurses work large amounts of overtime. Tired medics are much less effective ones, and ones who make mistakes.
And when I make a mistake in the classroom through exhaustion, I make a fool of myself and get a bollocking. When doctors and nurses do, people die.
And social workers.
Harsh. Social workers are people too, although I've no doubt you're right they die if doctors make mistakes.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Aren’t you being a bit picky? I was watching the athletics world championships and a commentator said attendances needed to rise for athletics. If you work in sport X and you’re talking to fans of sport X, then what’s wrong with discussing what sport X needs for it to thrive? No-one is proposing the overthrow of capitalism to achieve those rise. They want attendances to rise within a free market!
I’m astonished that they held the athletics world championship in such a small stadium, fewer than 25,000 people watching live - in a country with dozens of massive stadia.
It's great that the womens' footie is getting all the airtime for the reasons put forward by several posters. It is tempting to see the BBC's promotion of it as woke but as @MM said it's far more likely to be commercially-driven.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
The two issues are going to collide in the next couple of years when an averagely talented League 1 player decides that he has always really wanted to wear a frock
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Aren’t you being a bit picky? I was watching the athletics world championships and a commentator said attendances needed to rise for athletics. If you work in sport X and you’re talking to fans of sport X, then what’s wrong with discussing what sport X needs for it to thrive? No-one is proposing the overthrow of capitalism to achieve those rise. They want attendances to rise within a free market!
I’m astonished that they held the athletics world championship in such a small stadium, fewer than 25,000 people watching live - in a country with dozens of massive stadia.
I understand that Eugene, Oregon, is a hot-bed of athletics and is nicknamed “Track Town” so maybe they wanted somewhere with guaranteed full stadium and full local support?
At least more understandable than the World Cup in Qatar.
Nicola Sturgeon +15 Anas Sarwar +3 Keir Starmer 0 Alex Cole-Hamilton -11 Patrick Harvie -11 Lorna Slater -11 Douglas Ross -26 Rishi Sunak -28 UK govt -51 Alex Salmond -61 The Oaf -62
(Savanta ComRes; 23-28 June)
Starmer’s and especially Sunak’s popularity has absolutely plummeted in Scotland. Not difficult to surmise why.
There was a period not too long ago when some PBers were touting Rishi as saviour of the Union. I don’t think anyone has been so gormless thus far to say that about Fizzy Lizzy, but give it time.
It's great that the womens' footie is getting all the airtime for the reasons put forward by several posters. It is tempting to see the BBC's promotion of it as woke but as @MM said it's far more likely to be commercially-driven.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
The two issues are going to collide in the next couple of years when an averagely talented League 1 player decides that he has always really wanted to wear a frock
That won’t be a problem while the averagely talented League 1 player makes £100k a month, and the top Premier Leage women make £100k a year.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Aren’t you being a bit picky? I was watching the athletics world championships and a commentator said attendances needed to rise for athletics. If you work in sport X and you’re talking to fans of sport X, then what’s wrong with discussing what sport X needs for it to thrive? No-one is proposing the overthrow of capitalism to achieve those rise. They want attendances to rise within a free market!
I’m astonished that they held the athletics world championship in such a small stadium, fewer than 25,000 people watching live - in a country with dozens of massive stadia.
Eugene is the spiritual home of track in the USA though !
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Aren’t you being a bit picky? I was watching the athletics world championships and a commentator said attendances needed to rise for athletics. If you work in sport X and you’re talking to fans of sport X, then what’s wrong with discussing what sport X needs for it to thrive? No-one is proposing the overthrow of capitalism to achieve those rise. They want attendances to rise within a free market!
I’m astonished that they held the athletics world championship in such a small stadium, fewer than 25,000 people watching live - in a country with dozens of massive stadia.
The USA have never been particularly enthusiastic athletics fans. And Oregon is also the headquarters of Nike. Must have been a coincidence.
It's great that the womens' footie is getting all the airtime for the reasons put forward by several posters. It is tempting to see the BBC's promotion of it as woke but as @MM said it's far more likely to be commercially-driven.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
The two issues are going to collide in the next couple of years when an averagely talented League 1 player decides that he has always really wanted to wear a frock
They won't be allow to. The trend in sporting now is to disbar trans women. Tough on one or two individuals but fair to everyone else and the only sensible decision.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
Indeed, but that’s a different market 😉
And the Venn diagram of possible outcomes has quite a large space where the Tories are the largest party in a NOM. Labour's electoral performance remains disappointing for the midterm, the economic **** is already hitting the fan, they have a mountain to climb and the boundaries are against them.
Starmer has been a huge disappointment. It is becoming more and more obvious that he lacks a plan. He is a technocrat, simply intent on managing the ongoing decline. What a wasted opportunity.
Ed Davey has an open goal here. Can he do one of those fancy back-heelers?
No
Punters agree: in the Lib Dem Vote Share market the current FAV is 10-15%.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
I think that's right. I'm very struck by the huge personality choice in the Con-to-Lab switchers - 90% net negative about Boris is positively North Korean in unanimity, and 57% net positive about Starmer shows an enthusiasm not matched by any other part of the population with the possible exception of lifetime Labour voters. There is a chunk of people out there who totally agree with SKS's approach as the Ultimate Non-Boris.
That's probably largely immune to a popularity bounce for Truss. It's also unusual enough to make it unlikely that there will be lots more -note the 59% net negative about Starmer among the currently homeless 2019 Tories.
Starmer and Reeves will be putting forward some more concrete policy in September which may change some of that, and of course Truss may delight or disappoint beyond expectations. But as things stand, neither a Labour surge to overall majority nor a swingback to Tory majority looks likely.
Inicdentally, a Merit Award certificate from the General Secretary popped through the post for me yesterday, reflecting 50 years' membership, a nice thought. The progressive alternative to a telegram from the Queen. (Do telegrams still exist?)
It's great that the womens' footie is getting all the airtime for the reasons put forward by several posters. It is tempting to see the BBC's promotion of it as woke but as @MM said it's far more likely to be commercially-driven.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
The two issues are going to collide in the next couple of years when an averagely talented League 1 player decides that he has always really wanted to wear a frock
That won’t be a problem while the averagely talented League 1 play makes £100k a month, and the top Premier Leage women make £100k a year.
But in the future, quite possibly…
So life could imitate art - there was an episode of W1A where the bbc had to solve an accusation of bigotry by a transvestite footballer by allowing him to become a panellist on Match of the Day which was a disaster.
YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:
London Lab 54% Con 20% LD 12% Grn 9% Ref 2%
Rest of South Con 38% Lab 32% LD 19% Grn 7% Ref 3%
Midlands and Wales Lab 40% Con 35% LD 8% Ref 6% Grn 6% PC 3%
North Lab 46% Con 28% LD 8% Grn 10% Ref 4%
Scotland SNP 43% Con 24% Lab 22% Grn 7% LD 4%
(YouGov / The Times Survey Results Sample Size: 1692; 21st - 22nd July 2022)
Swing of 0.5% SNP to SCon since 2019
Keep believing.
They might even gain Gordon from the SNP on that swing, Labour would also pick up Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath from the SNP on the Yougov Scottish figures
Have you the faintest conception of what the MoE is on subsamples? Even correctly weighted ones? About 8%. Good luck with those seat predictions.
The SCons were on 19% in the last proper, full-sample Scottish poll.
Either way poor figures for Sturgeon given her desire for a thumping SNP win and big SNP gains at the next general election when the SC likely confirms no indyref2 affecting the Union without UK government consent
Pro-independence parties at 51% BritNat parties at 48%
Fill yer breeks Franco Fan.
SNP and Greens at 50% combined not 51%, she would need to get pro independence parties well over 60% to have any leeway over a UK government which will continue to refuse indyref2 whether Starmer or Truss/Sunak is PM (unless Tories win most seats in a hung parliament and Starmer changes his mind to get into No 10)
Alba is by far the biggest “Other” party, so yes, 51%.
And don’t forget that approx 1/3 of SLab voters are pro-independence. So 52% + 7% = bloody close to your 60% figure.
But by all means, continue to be complacent.
But some of the SNP/Green voters are anti-independence. We know that because we have regular polling on support for independence, and it’s below 50% of course!
The last poll (Panelbase/Sunday Times; 29 June-1 July) has Yes on 51%.
But yes, you are of course correct: a small, but significant, number of SNP and Green voters are not pro-independence. But they are hardly diehard Unionists either! This is where the BetterTogether2 parties are making their key error: they continually address core No voters and ignore the soft centre.
No was on 54% in the Techne poll earlier this month
It's great that the womens' footie is getting all the airtime for the reasons put forward by several posters. It is tempting to see the BBC's promotion of it as woke but as @MM said it's far more likely to be commercially-driven.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
I have watched 4 games now England v Norway, Spain, and Sweden, then Germany v France last night.
My feeling is the skill levels in the first 3 were very good, the games were fast, open and entertaining.
Last night's game, was not as good. The ball was given away too often, failed passes, missed first touches etc. More like women's football I remember from pervious years. (But tbf watching England's men's team can feel like that.)
I'd watch more if the quality is maintained at the level of those first 3 matches.
Nicola Sturgeon +15 Anas Sarwar +3 Keir Starmer 0 Alex Cole-Hamilton -11 Patrick Harvie -11 Lorna Slater -11 Douglas Ross -26 Rishi Sunak -28 UK govt -51 Alex Salmond -61 The Oaf -62
(Savanta ComRes; 23-28 June)
Starmer’s and especially Sunak’s popularity has absolutely plummeted in Scotland. Not difficult to surmise why.
So on that basis then Truss could actually get a swing to her in Scotland at least compared to Boris in 2019, even if she sees a swing against her compared to Boris in England and Wales.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
I think that's right. I'm very struck by the huge personality choice in the Con-to-Lab switchers - 90% net negative about Boris is positively North Korean in unanimity, and 57% net positive about Starmer shows an enthusiasm not matched by any other part of the population with the possible exception of lifetime Labour voters. There is a chunk of people out there who totally agree with SKS's approach as the Ultimate Non-Boris.
That's probably largely immune to a popularity bounce for Truss. It's also unusual enough to make it unlikely that there will be lots more -note the 59% net negative about Starmer among the currently homeless 2019 Tories.
Starmer and Reeves will be putting forward some more concrete policy in September which may change some of that, and of course Truss may delight or disappoint beyond expectations. But as things stand, neither a Labour surge to overall majority nor a swingback to Tory majority looks likely.
Inicdentally, a Merit Award certificate from the General Secretary popped through the post for me yesterday, reflecting 50 years' membership, a nice thought. The progressive alternative to a telegram from the Queen. (Do telegrams still exist?)
Well done Nick!
(I have spent 50 years thinking I might join Labour, but never doing so. Is there a Prevarication Award for that, I wonder?)
The employment tribunal victories of @MForstater & @BluskyeAllison have strengthened my resolve to stay in politics & to see off the bullies who’ve tried to silence me. I am so grateful to them & their supporters.
With regards to the Starmer - Tarry - Jones escapade, the funniest thing of all is the absolute fury that Jones has worked himself into because he has realised that Starmer played him for a fool.
Wasn't it obvious from the start that Starmer wouldn't stick to the pledges he was making to placate hard left members? To start with most of those members would quickly become former members, so pledges to people who left the party in disgust at your election don't count for much.
And it is wider than that. Starmer was obviously and pointedly telling them what they wanted to hear rather than what he actually thought. He didn't believe in the stuff he was pledging as anyone with eyes and a brain could see.
So why is Jones so ANGRY? Because apparently he thought Starmer was being sincere. Only a fool learns to get fooled. And Jones is a prize fool. His "get out there, get in his face, tell him what you think" is a dangerous incitement.
Tarry is right though. Pushing through major real wage cuts for working people should not be Labour policy. The vast majority of people have not had a significant payrise in years, so clearly it is not wages driving inflation. The Fed is busy pushing up interest rates, but that too seems to not be addressing the underlying reasons for inflation.
Until hydrocarbon fuels normalise, the war in Ukraine and Russia sanctions are over, and post covid supply chains recover we will have inflation. In the meantime suppressing workers wages and adding mortgage rate increases just piles on the misery and runs the risk of an unnecessarily sharp downturn in the economy.
Just as there is the wrong kind of snow, there are evidently wrong kinds of picket lines.
I think we ought to have female commentators for more of the women's games. Sue Smith (an ex-professional) does a far better job at explaining than the male commentators. And she's less likely to ignore mistakes than the men who come over as patronising, by ignoring them.
Sort of on topic, I could see Keir Starmer having precisely the same problem against Truss that Rishi has had.
He's a tactical triangulator, not a strategic thinker.
I'm not sure that's right. He has a very clear strategy:
1. I am not Corbyn. (tick) 2. My team and I are sensible and not Boris or his team. (tick) 3. I have an unstated non-aggression pact with the LibDems. (tick) 4. I have a few unthreatening but modestly interesting policies. (September) 5. I have some more striking and really quite interesting policies. (2023) 6. Win. (2024)
It's an intensely boring strategy at this point, and not at all what lefties like me want. But it's a strategy, and quite possibly a winning one.
Nicola Sturgeon +15 Anas Sarwar +3 Keir Starmer 0 Alex Cole-Hamilton -11 Patrick Harvie -11 Lorna Slater -11 Douglas Ross -26 Rishi Sunak -28 UK govt -51 Alex Salmond -61 The Oaf -62
(Savanta ComRes; 23-28 June)
Starmer’s and especially Sunak’s popularity has absolutely plummeted in Scotland. Not difficult to surmise why.
There was a period not too long ago when some PBers were touting Rishi as saviour of the Union. I don’t think anyone has been so gormless thus far to say that about Fizzy Lizzy, but give it time.
Unionist PBers have anointed several hundred Saviours of the Union since the obscure blog was launched in 2004. Of course Liz will get her moment in their sun… before they unceremoniously dump her too.
I think the women's Euros does deserve a lot of media attention. What I wasn't impressed by was Jonathan Pearce's comment last night that "attendances at Women's PL matches need to rise". No they don't. It's a free market, people can choose what they watch.
Aren’t you being a bit picky? I was watching the athletics world championships and a commentator said attendances needed to rise for athletics. If you work in sport X and you’re talking to fans of sport X, then what’s wrong with discussing what sport X needs for it to thrive? No-one is proposing the overthrow of capitalism to achieve those rise. They want attendances to rise within a free market!
I’m astonished that they held the athletics world championship in such a small stadium, fewer than 25,000 people watching live - in a country with dozens of massive stadia.
I understand that Eugene, Oregon, is a hot-bed of athletics and is nicknamed “Track Town” so maybe they wanted somewhere with guaranteed full stadium and full local support?
At least more understandable than the World Cup in Qatar.
Anything’s more understandable than the World Cup in Qatar! But the FIFA committee all got lovely gold Rolex watches, so life is good.
I’d have thought that the IAAF would have wanted the opportunity to sell more than 250k tickets to their championship, when much larger venues were available. The IOC and FIFA specify minimum stadium capacities for their events, I think usually 60k.
With regards to the Starmer - Tarry - Jones escapade, the funniest thing of all is the absolute fury that Jones has worked himself into because he has realised that Starmer played him for a fool.
Wasn't it obvious from the start that Starmer wouldn't stick to the pledges he was making to placate hard left members? To start with most of those members would quickly become former members, so pledges to people who left the party in disgust at your election don't count for much.
And it is wider than that. Starmer was obviously and pointedly telling them what they wanted to hear rather than what he actually thought. He didn't believe in the stuff he was pledging as anyone with eyes and a brain could see.
So why is Jones so ANGRY? Because apparently he thought Starmer was being sincere. Only a fool learns to get fooled. And Jones is a prize fool. His "get out there, get in his face, tell him what you think" is a dangerous incitement.
Tarry is right though. Pushing through major real wage cuts for working people should not be Labour policy. The vast majority of people have not had a significant payrise in years, so clearly it is not wages driving inflation. The Fed is busy pushing up interest rates, but that too seems to not be addressing the underlying reasons for inflation.
Until hydrocarbon fuels normalise, the war in Ukraine and Russia sanctions are over, and post covid supply chains recover we will have inflation. In the meantime suppressing workers wages and adding mortgage rate increases just piles on the misery and runs the risk of an unnecessarily sharp downturn in the economy.
Just as there is the wrong kind of snow, there are evidently wrong kinds of picket lines.
There is some awful phrasing there - the public don't want strikes but it's important to remember that surveys show they understand why they are happening.
Seems Nadine has declared that Johnson was removed via a "coup".
Incredible. Parts of Tory Party heading off into the dangerous La La Land inhabited by much of GOP these days.
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 44m There was not a coup, for goodness sake. This is a parliamentary system. The government disintegrated because so many people had had enough of his uselessness. Practical example? Here's one. In Jan/Feb he could have Thatcher/Brown style gripped the energy crisis. He did not.
Nicola Sturgeon +15 Anas Sarwar +3 Keir Starmer 0 Alex Cole-Hamilton -11 Patrick Harvie -11 Lorna Slater -11 Douglas Ross -26 Rishi Sunak -28 UK govt -51 Alex Salmond -61 The Oaf -62
(Savanta ComRes; 23-28 June)
Starmer’s and especially Sunak’s popularity has absolutely plummeted in Scotland. Not difficult to surmise why.
So on that basis then Truss could actually get a swing to her in Scotland at least compared to Boris in 2019, even if she sees a swing against her compared to Boris in England and Wales.
Remember she was also partly raised in Paisley
Can hardly turn a corner in Feegie Park without hearing chat about Lizzy’s Paisley lineage.
Seems Nadine has declared that Johnson was removed via a "coup".
Incredible. Parts of Tory Party heading off into the dangerous La La Land inhabited by much of GOP these days.
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 44m There was not a coup, for goodness sake. This is a parliamentary system. The government disintegrated because so many people had had enough of his uselessness. Practical example? Here's one. In Jan/Feb he could have Thatcher/Brown style gripped the energy crisis. He did not.
Some facts about the green belt. Yes, it has been shrinking. In 2021, it was a whole 194 sq km smaller than in 2014. At current rates (based on my analysis of CPRE figures) we risk concreting the whole thing over in just 5,000 years.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
I think that's right. I'm very struck by the huge personality choice in the Con-to-Lab switchers - 90% net negative about Boris is positively North Korean in unanimity, and 57% net positive about Starmer shows an enthusiasm not matched by any other part of the population with the possible exception of lifetime Labour voters. There is a chunk of people out there who totally agree with SKS's approach as the Ultimate Non-Boris.
That's probably largely immune to a popularity bounce for Truss. It's also unusual enough to make it unlikely that there will be lots more -note the 59% net negative about Starmer among the currently homeless 2019 Tories.
Starmer and Reeves will be putting forward some more concrete policy in September which may change some of that, and of course Truss may delight or disappoint beyond expectations. But as things stand, neither a Labour surge to overall majority nor a swingback to Tory majority looks likely.
Inicdentally, a Merit Award certificate from the General Secretary popped through the post for me yesterday, reflecting 50 years' membership, a nice thought. The progressive alternative to a telegram from the Queen. (Do telegrams still exist?)
Well done! I’ve only been a member of the Scottish National Party for 36 years.
Seems Nadine has declared that Johnson was removed via a "coup".
Incredible. Parts of Tory Party heading off into the dangerous La La Land inhabited by much of GOP these days.
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 44m There was not a coup, for goodness sake. This is a parliamentary system. The government disintegrated because so many people had had enough of his uselessness. Practical example? Here's one. In Jan/Feb he could have Thatcher/Brown style gripped the energy crisis. He did not.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
I think that's right. I'm very struck by the huge personality choice in the Con-to-Lab switchers - 90% net negative about Boris is positively North Korean in unanimity, and 57% net positive about Starmer shows an enthusiasm not matched by any other part of the population with the possible exception of lifetime Labour voters. There is a chunk of people out there who totally agree with SKS's approach as the Ultimate Non-Boris.
That's probably largely immune to a popularity bounce for Truss. It's also unusual enough to make it unlikely that there will be lots more -note the 59% net negative about Starmer among the currently homeless 2019 Tories.
Starmer and Reeves will be putting forward some more concrete policy in September which may change some of that, and of course Truss may delight or disappoint beyond expectations. But as things stand, neither a Labour surge to overall majority nor a swingback to Tory majority looks likely.
Inicdentally, a Merit Award certificate from the General Secretary popped through the post for me yesterday, reflecting 50 years' membership, a nice thought. The progressive alternative to a telegram from the Queen. (Do telegrams still exist?)
Congrats on 50 years of membership. Quite an achievement.
Although I hope it doesn't make you feel old if I was to say that you became a member at about the same time I was conceived. Not that I'm insinuating any connection between the two events... )
Nicola Sturgeon +15 Anas Sarwar +3 Keir Starmer 0 Alex Cole-Hamilton -11 Patrick Harvie -11 Lorna Slater -11 Douglas Ross -26 Rishi Sunak -28 UK govt -51 Alex Salmond -61 The Oaf -62
(Savanta ComRes; 23-28 June)
Starmer’s and especially Sunak’s popularity has absolutely plummeted in Scotland. Not difficult to surmise why.
So on that basis then Truss could actually get a swing to her in Scotland at least compared to Boris in 2019, even if she sees a swing against her compared to Boris in England and Wales.
Remember she was also partly raised in Paisley
Can hardly turn a corner in Feegie Park without hearing chat about Lizzy’s Paisley lineage.
Seems Nadine has declared that Johnson was removed via a "coup".
Incredible. Parts of Tory Party heading off into the dangerous La La Land inhabited by much of GOP these days.
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 44m There was not a coup, for goodness sake. This is a parliamentary system. The government disintegrated because so many people had had enough of his uselessness. Practical example? Here's one. In Jan/Feb he could have Thatcher/Brown style gripped the energy crisis. He did not.
Would be nice if for once the Tories did something because it was the right thing and not because they saw some advantage for themselves in it.
At the moment they mostly seem to be doing the things that they see advantage in that don't intersect with being the right thing to do, so it would at least be a step forward if they did things that were both.
Nicola Sturgeon +15 Anas Sarwar +3 Keir Starmer 0 Alex Cole-Hamilton -11 Patrick Harvie -11 Lorna Slater -11 Douglas Ross -26 Rishi Sunak -28 UK govt -51 Alex Salmond -61 The Oaf -62
(Savanta ComRes; 23-28 June)
Starmer’s and especially Sunak’s popularity has absolutely plummeted in Scotland. Not difficult to surmise why.
So on that basis then Truss could actually get a swing to her in Scotland at least compared to Boris in 2019, even if she sees a swing against her compared to Boris in England and Wales.
Remember she was also partly raised in Paisley
Can hardly turn a corner in Feegie Park without hearing chat about Lizzy’s Paisley lineage.
To be fair, there were some here who denied hearing Michael Gove's Scottish accent.
Seems Nadine has declared that Johnson was removed via a "coup".
Incredible. Parts of Tory Party heading off into the dangerous La La Land inhabited by much of GOP these days.
Iain Martin @iainmartin1 · 44m There was not a coup, for goodness sake. This is a parliamentary system. The government disintegrated because so many people had had enough of his uselessness. Practical example? Here's one. In Jan/Feb he could have Thatcher/Brown style gripped the energy crisis. He did not.
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
I think that's right. I'm very struck by the huge personality choice in the Con-to-Lab switchers - 90% net negative about Boris is positively North Korean in unanimity, and 57% net positive about Starmer shows an enthusiasm not matched by any other part of the population with the possible exception of lifetime Labour voters. There is a chunk of people out there who totally agree with SKS's approach as the Ultimate Non-Boris.
That's probably largely immune to a popularity bounce for Truss. It's also unusual enough to make it unlikely that there will be lots more -note the 59% net negative about Starmer among the currently homeless 2019 Tories.
Starmer and Reeves will be putting forward some more concrete policy in September which may change some of that, and of course Truss may delight or disappoint beyond expectations. But as things stand, neither a Labour surge to overall majority nor a swingback to Tory majority looks likely.
Inicdentally, a Merit Award certificate from the General Secretary popped through the post for me yesterday, reflecting 50 years' membership, a nice thought. The progressive alternative to a telegram from the Queen. (Do telegrams still exist?)
I suspect the switchers (I am one) are:
Those who are trad Labour and have fallen out with Boris
Those who are dull centrist Tories (me) and notice a lot of dull centrism in SKS, though Davey is even duller.
If Tory members had any sense they would be vying for the dull centrist vote. They already have the Dorries and JRM vote. And hope that Labour left wreck SKS.
In truth the real wish among the centre ground electorate is nothing to do with ideology. It is to do with ordinary competence and basic honesty and having a serious plan.
Ideologically there are no excellent options in the western world at the moment. Only sub-optimal and worse ones.
In the world as it now is a Lab government reliant on the LDs look y far the better option, though well short of great.
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
Green belt housing would be for London commuters, who don't necessarily all want to live in Singaporean flat blocks.
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
Never let anyone accuse you of not putting your party before all else.
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
I wouldn't take a leasehold flat in a high rise building off your hands if you paid me to do so.
Uncapped service charges, don't own a brick, rip-off management companies, total failure of the government to sort out the cladding scandal years after Grenfell.
Will Boris really give Truss the headache of by elections? If Nad is in the Lords, she will be denied the premiership. How on Earth will the Tories find someone worse next time? Mogg?
Will Boris really give Truss the headache of by elections? If Nad is in the Lords, she will be denied the premiership. How on Earth will the Tories find someone worse next time? Mogg?
Dorries' seat is astonishingly safe, it'd be a nice easy hold for Truss to get (Along with Tamworth) for the start of her ministry.
I wonder what Truss will do with Dorries. Will she reward her loyalty, or slowly and quietly drop her?
Nad will go to the Lords in Boris's resignation honours list.
Doesn’t it just perfectly encapsulate how fucked up the second chamber is that it’s a place to stuff people into to get them out of the way or reward them for ineptitude and loyalty rather than a place where you appoint people for their abilities to help improve and run the country.
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
No, London is already a hot-spot that unbalances the economy. We need new towns along with refurbishment of old, declining towns. Instant levelling up.
Will Boris really give Truss the headache of by elections? If Nad is in the Lords, she will be denied the premiership. How on Earth will the Tories find someone worse next time? Mogg?
80-seat majority means no danger to the government, and if the Tories do lose a by-election or half-dozen, that just proves they were wrong to sack Boris. Win-win for the World King.
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
No, London is already a hot-spot that unbalances the economy. We need new towns along with refurbishment of old, declining towns. Instant levelling up.
In brownfield sites not greenbelt.
London is the main problem when it comes to lack of affordable housing, North of Watford there isn't really a problem. In the North East the average house price is a quarter that in London
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
I wouldn't take a leasehold flat in a high rise building off your hands if you paid me to do so.
Uncapped service charges, don't own a brick, rip-off management companies, total failure of the government to sort out the cladding scandal years after Grenfell.
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
No, London is already a hot-spot that unbalances the economy. We need new towns along with refurbishment of old, declining towns. Instant levelling up.
In brownfield sites not greenbelt.
London is the main problem when it comes to lack of affordable housing, North of Watford there isn't really a problem. In the North East the average house price is a quarter that in London
Yes and that is because economic activity is concentrated in London. That has to change.
Except the levels of property ownership are lowest by far in London. What is needed there is building up through more high rise primarily.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
Green belt housing would be for London commuters, who don't necessarily all want to live in Singaporean flat blocks.
London suburban housing fine for them and most of them if they want to buy in the Home counties can already afford to do so with their London wages
It's great that the womens' footie is getting all the airtime for the reasons put forward by several posters. It is tempting to see the BBC's promotion of it as woke but as @MM said it's far more likely to be commercially-driven.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
NO ONE SHOULD GET TOO HET UP ABOUT IT??
FOR GOD’S SAKE MAN DO YOU EVEN REALISE WHERE YOU ARE????
*scoops out eye with imperial Danish dessert spoon*
In my opinion the figures should be something like this: [assumes the new boundaries are in force]
NOM 2.22 Con Maj 2.22 Lab Maj 10
I concur with your Lab Maj 10 opinion, for the simple reason that Anas Sarwar has stalled in the low 20s, and the English Midlands are still stubbornly sticking with the Tories.
However, your Con Maj 2.22 is waaaay too short. The economic shit has yet to hit the fan, and when it does the Tories are going to get all the blame.
NOM looks like a shoo in. Barring… events dear boy.
Labour largest party looks the safest bet.
I think that's right. I'm very struck by the huge personality choice in the Con-to-Lab switchers - 90% net negative about Boris is positively North Korean in unanimity, and 57% net positive about Starmer shows an enthusiasm not matched by any other part of the population with the possible exception of lifetime Labour voters. There is a chunk of people out there who totally agree with SKS's approach as the Ultimate Non-Boris.
That's probably largely immune to a popularity bounce for Truss. It's also unusual enough to make it unlikely that there will be lots more -note the 59% net negative about Starmer among the currently homeless 2019 Tories.
Starmer and Reeves will be putting forward some more concrete policy in September which may change some of that, and of course Truss may delight or disappoint beyond expectations. But as things stand, neither a Labour surge to overall majority nor a swingback to Tory majority looks likely.
Inicdentally, a Merit Award certificate from the General Secretary popped through the post for me yesterday, reflecting 50 years' membership, a nice thought. The progressive alternative to a telegram from the Queen. (Do telegrams still exist?)
Congratulations Nick. When can we expect the drift rightwards?
Comments
I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you.
I found myself agreeing with Janet Street-Porter that the womens football team are preferable role models to the love island girls competing for the nations affections.
Womens football would probably do well to avoid trying to push for money like the mens game as they can occupy a market position where it’s cheap for families to go (as it is currently) - if they start pushing for pay equality then they have to generate the funds for that which will push up ticket prices and scare away an audience. At present each WSL team is subsidised by their Premier League Team by a few million a year and if that increases the PL owners will want to claw it back.
Instead of being a matter of personal interest, private choice and local news sport has come to occupy a place in commerce (lots of private and public cash); society (it has become cultural glue at local, national and international level); and the direction of people's lives (loyalty can be at ludicrous and fanatical levels without any sense of irony).
Also it is a useful vehicle for those who wish to compel others to have particular opinions.
So how astonished we are to discover that it is awash with money, corruption, drugs and politics.
NB I am a recent convert to the merits of women's football. But what could possibly go wrong.....?
The difficulty in believing that is it's clear the paperwork and due diligence was not done on the prospective adoptive mother. Which leaves CSS with a credibility gap.
And the issue is whether the paperwork is done or not a child was taken from an environment where he would have been closely monitored by a number of agencies for his own safety and placed in an environment where he was murdered without anyone noticing anything was wrong.
However I write that, that's a disaster and one for which negligence laws would seem to apply.
Steady as she goes: Teachers & nurses
Need a pay rise: Criminal barristers doing legal aid work, ancilliary staff
Sinema could still blow this up but it would be an astounding act of self harm that would probably lead to a successful primary challenge if she did so in my inexpert view.
At the moment the daily standing charge means that the poorest customers pay more for each kW of energy that they use. That's bonkers.
But there would have been two minor drawbacks:
1) I was already sufficiently ill I might not have made it through another year;
2) My trust would have gone bankrupt.
I personally think it's madness to even be considering making doctors and nurses work large amounts of overtime. Tired medics are much less effective ones, and ones who make mistakes.
And when I make a mistake in the classroom through exhaustion, I make a fool of myself and get a bollocking. When doctors and nurses do, people die.
Ed Davey has an open goal here. Can he do one of those fancy back-heelers?
Prices start from:
General Admission £12 adult / £6 concessions
Club Level £35 adult / £17.50 concessions
That's not bad, but you've still got to get there. Women's football is competing for people's time as well as their money.
2) I want to know loads about the baby's father and how well he took to his responsibilities as a prospective parent and what support he received and gave. There's a bit of silence there.
He's a tactical triangulator, not a strategic thinker.
It's a blight that afflicts much of the commentary on Women's cricket. Instead of the commentators telling me about the line and length being bowled, or the field placing, or what this says about the strategy to take a wicket, they're continually droning on about whether there should be more women's red ball cricket. Talk about the women's cricket that's actually happening!
My daughter went with her Brownies to see a non-England game. I watched the game just to see if I could see her in the crowd (I did) and she was sat with quite a big group of Brownies.
Afterwards she said she loved it and she'd like to go see a women's football game again. It wasn't something she'd ever been interested in before, but this got her interested in it.
Now, the birth mother may be lying from start to finish. But at the same time, that's almost irrelevant. I think one or two people are looking at the sob story from the mother and overlooking the real story that the BBC should have gone for - the social services should face charges of neglect under the Children Act 2004.
I haven't watched any games but the 3mins59secs highlights of England vs Sweden seemed fine although I wouldn't describe the backheel goal as "one of the best I've ever seen" as one (male I think) commentator put it.
As with the trans thing there will be an overshoot in this case in the promotion/description of it which is fine; we are going through a period of change (womens' sports becoming more prominent) and such overshoots are expected. No one should get too het up about it.
At least more understandable than the World Cup in Qatar.
But in the future, quite possibly…
That's probably largely immune to a popularity bounce for Truss. It's also unusual enough to make it unlikely that there will be lots more -note the 59% net negative about Starmer among the currently homeless 2019 Tories.
Starmer and Reeves will be putting forward some more concrete policy in September which may change some of that, and of course Truss may delight or disappoint beyond expectations. But as things stand, neither a Labour surge to overall majority nor a swingback to Tory majority looks likely.
Inicdentally, a Merit Award certificate from the General Secretary popped through the post for me yesterday, reflecting 50 years' membership, a nice thought. The progressive alternative to a telegram from the Queen. (Do telegrams still exist?)
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1543323895071215618?s=20&t=k2ZPvGf-luPCvuoCGbhb1A
My feeling is the skill levels in the first 3 were very good, the games were fast, open and entertaining.
Last night's game, was not as good. The ball was given away too often, failed passes, missed first touches etc. More like women's football I remember from pervious years. (But tbf watching England's men's team can feel like that.)
I'd watch more if the quality is maintained at the level of those first 3 matches.
Remember she was also partly raised in Paisley
(I have spent 50 years thinking I might join Labour, but never doing so. Is there a Prevarication Award for that, I wonder?)
https://twitter.com/joannaccherry/status/1552565033397280770
1. I am not Corbyn. (tick)
2. My team and I are sensible and not Boris or his team. (tick)
3. I have an unstated non-aggression pact with the LibDems. (tick)
4. I have a few unthreatening but modestly interesting policies. (September)
5. I have some more striking and really quite interesting policies. (2023)
6. Win. (2024)
It's an intensely boring strategy at this point, and not at all what lefties like me want. But it's a strategy, and quite possibly a winning one.
Jack McConnell was the future once.
I’d have thought that the IAAF would have wanted the opportunity to sell more than 250k tickets to their championship, when much larger venues were available. The IOC and FIFA specify minimum stadium capacities for their events, I think usually 60k.
https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1552552927235031042
The main problem is that the many Tories don't view housing through a longer-term electoral lens.
Unaffordable housing is currently acting as a roadblock to family formation.
Unlocking greater home-ownership and family formation would grow the number of Tory-friendly voters.
https://twitter.com/rakibehsan/status/1552563895633694720
Incredible. Parts of Tory Party heading off into the dangerous La La Land inhabited by much of GOP these days.
Iain Martin
@iainmartin1
·
44m
There was not a coup, for goodness sake. This is a parliamentary system. The government disintegrated because so many people had had enough of his uselessness. Practical example? Here's one. In Jan/Feb he could have Thatcher/Brown style gripped the energy crisis. He did not.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1552558347475468289
RIP.
Incidentally, I think a sequel to the Railway Children is being released soon.
https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1552557380638068736
Nads: hold my Prosecco.
Although I hope it doesn't make you feel old if I was to say that you became a member at about the same time I was conceived. Not that I'm insinuating any connection between the two events... )
Or an effigy. Always getting those two confused.
You used a coup to remove Boris Johnson when he became too unpopular.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6IsUeWO2Yw
NEW: The number of deaths due to drug misuse fell slightly in Scotland last year to 1,330 but was still the 2nd highest on record. 2021 is the 1st year since 2013 when there has not been an increase. Read on for main points. Full report:
https://nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/vital-events/deaths/drug-related-deaths-in-scotland…
#NRSStats 1/4
https://twitter.com/NatRecordsScot/status/1552572662043578368
Those who are trad Labour and have fallen out with Boris
Those who are dull centrist Tories (me) and notice a lot of dull centrism in SKS, though Davey is even duller.
If Tory members had any sense they would be vying for the dull centrist vote. They already have the Dorries and JRM vote. And hope that Labour left wreck SKS.
In truth the real wish among the centre ground electorate is nothing to do with ideology. It is to do with ordinary competence and basic honesty and having a serious plan.
Ideologically there are no excellent options in the western world at the moment. Only sub-optimal and worse ones.
In the world as it now is a Lab government reliant on the LDs look y far the better option, though well short of great.
We are also already one of the most densely populated nations in the world, we need to protect our countryside as much as we can. Building all over the greenbelt also will just lead to more home counties seats going LD
Which works far too well as an electoral tactic, but is a terrible way to run a country.
Uncapped service charges, don't own a brick, rip-off management companies, total failure of the government to sort out the cladding scandal years after Grenfell.
London is the main problem when it comes to lack of affordable housing, North of Watford there isn't really a problem. In the North East the average house price is a quarter that in London
NO ONE SHOULD GET TOO HET UP ABOUT IT??
FOR GOD’S SAKE MAN DO YOU EVEN REALISE WHERE YOU ARE????
*scoops out eye with imperial Danish dessert spoon*