Keir was daft to make such a belt-and-braces promise to the membership. It reads like something from Michael Foot.
He is also daft to junk it, seemingly wholesale, when elements have never seemed more appropriate.
I wonder if there's some model of public ownership other than the typical nationalisation that he might go for. That way Labour can say they're not going to nationalise but will be able to claim they've kept their promise for some kind of public ownership. Maybe Government shareholders or something like that.
Contrary to what's often discussed or assumed on PB and elsewhere, Corbyn and McDonnell were in fact heading somewhere similar, possibly combined with a decentralised, mutualised-type option.
I disagree on that. Those two had fair too to much 'run by/controlled by the 'people' vibes'.
quotes like this: Labour pledged to bring energy, rail, water, and mail into public ownership and to put democratic management at the heart of how those industries are run.
That 'democratic management' part sends shudders down my spine about that that actually means.
or this 'In public hands, under democratic control, workforces and their unions will be the managers of this change, not its casualties.'
Just been out to water my tomatoes (they need doing three times a day at the moment). It's only three hours since I picked a load, and I could already pick the same number again. They're ripening so quickly..
I'm glad my folks are back from holiday tomorrow (in Sandbanks this time, so unlikely to bring back fancy olive oil!), and they can help me eat them
Render down to puree and freeze, for tomato soup and puttanesca all winter. (So long as there aren't too many power cuts.)
I made pasta sauce earlier in the week with some of my tomato glut and it was fantastic. Its a great time of year for easy home grown produce - runner beans, new potatoes and soon my sweetcorn will be in (a few more weeks). Love this time of year, but would quite like some rain!
Food, education, urban parks*, public transport, culture, pubs etc are all better in London. Plus you have proximity to Europe.
New York is better for can-do attitude, salaries, taxation, hours of sunlight, and very easy proximity to the great outdoors. Plus, as I said above suburban (or perhaps exurban) housing is astonishingly cheap.
Healthcare is a wash, depending on your circumstances.
*Except Central Park, which has no peer in London.
New York is a lot colder and a lot hotter for a lot of the year though. I prefer the climate in london apart from spring and autumn when NY is much nicer.
It is too hot and sticky for about six weeks in summer. It’s really screwed up my running which I refuse to do above 25 degrees Celsius.
Winters are v cold but v bright. London’s three-month gloom depressed me.
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
My own view is that for people on median incomes, life is definitely better in the USA than it is here. But, for the poor, it's worse.
That used to be true, now it is not true. To my mind
The average American life is now notably worse than the average European life, in multiple ways. For the top 10% in the USA life is still absolutely fabulous, but that is the case in most parts of the world
I don’t agree with this. It’s certainly true for the bottom 30% or 40%.
It then gets progressively less true, depending precisely where in the US.
Looking at key metros, SF, LA and NYC are in certain respects quite dysfunctional such that unless you are in the top 10% or 5% you might be better off in Europe.
What is undeniably true is that there are vast swathes of Americans living in big houses with big cars, far away from poor people with all their problems, living incredibly comfortably.
Perhaps I am influenced by my recent road trip through the Deep South, which is a less happy part of America
But, I don't think I am. Here's one basic fact: Americans take on average 14 days of paid holiday a year. Europeans get 28 days or more
That might seem trivial, it really isn't. Holidays are what make life bearable for a lot of people in boring jobs. Plus Europeans can easily holiday in Europe
Food, education, urban parks*, public transport, culture, pubs etc are all better in London. Plus you have proximity to Europe.
New York is better for can-do attitude, salaries, taxation, hours of sunlight, and very easy proximity to the great outdoors. Plus, as I said above suburban (or perhaps exurban) housing is astonishingly cheap.
Healthcare is a wash, depending on your circumstances.
*Except Central Park, which has no peer in London.
New York is a lot colder and a lot hotter for a lot of the year though. I prefer the climate in london apart from spring and autumn when NY is much nicer.
It is too hot and sticky for about six weeks in summer. It’s really screwed up my running which I refuse to do above 25 degrees Celsius.
Winters are v cold but v bright. London’s three-month gloom depressed me.
It is 33 degrees C in London today
It's gorgeous today, but @Gardenwalker is right about London winters. They are dismal and dark. Mind you, NYC in winter is often freeze-your-balls-off cold, in a way we don't experience, and is not exactly pleasant
Here's the Ottolenghi bread-and-tomato-and-anchovies salad recipe. Remember to use URFA chili flakes, from the home of Gobekli Tepe. Use any other kind of chili flake and it will be disgusting
Mint leaves 'roughly torn' To get the full benefit they should be roughly torn by a burly tradesman who carries a cache of reserved fennel fronds. What an absolute cock
No, it's not cock. This stuff genuinely makes a difference. I've tried it and noticed it
eg the salad caprese I just had. In a restaurant the mozzarella will often (nearly always?) be carefully sliced and neatly arrayed, interleaved with tomatoes. But I did my research and Jamie Oliver (and others) say to tear it up in rough chunks. Why? Because it creates a blob of cheese with a much more interesting mouthfeel, plus you have way more actual cheese surface - because of the roughness - which can then soak up the oil, vinegar, salt, tomato juice, mmmmness
It is exactly the same principle the Italians use in creating different pasta shapes. For different sauces you want different pastas depending on how much sauce you want the pasta to soak up, and how you want it soaked. Generally, the crinklier the pasta the better: it will retain more sauce on each bite of pasta
So yes, "roughly torn" is probably right, and you are wrong in this instance. Sorry
This is absolutely correct, but there are some people who just won’t be told.
The belief some people have that pasta is interchangeable drives me crazy.
Yes, totally!
"Pasta is pasta"
OMG no it isn't. Fusilli is completely different to spaghetti which is totally different to farfalle. Italians have been doing this for CENTURIES and they are not stupid bad cooks
It's like saying chips are like crisps (or vice versa if you are American)
Make me an alphabetti spaghetti sandwich (on a white warburtons sandwich loaf) and we can talk about them funny bow tie pastas you get in London restaurants
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
My own view is that for people on median incomes, life is definitely better in the USA than it is here. But, for the poor, it's worse.
That used to be true, now it is not true. To my mind
The average American life is now notably worse than the average European life, in multiple ways. For the top 10% in the USA life is still absolutely fabulous, but that is the case in most parts of the world
I don’t agree with this. It’s certainly true for the bottom 30% or 40%.
It then gets progressively less true, depending precisely where in the US.
Looking at key metros, SF, LA and NYC are in certain respects quite dysfunctional such that unless you are in the top 10% or 5% you might be better off in Europe.
What is undeniably true is that there are vast swathes of Americans living in big houses with big cars, far away from poor people with all their problems, living incredibly comfortably.
I don't know if it's as high as 30-40%, but that's only my impression. I think it's definitely worse for the bottom 20%. Being poor in urban America, or the rural South is definitely no joke. What makes it worse is not just the lack of income, but the widespread belief you're the one to blame for being poor, and the unwelcome attention you get from law enforcement agencies.
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
My own view is that for people on median incomes, life is definitely better in the USA than it is here. But, for the poor, it's worse.
That used to be true, now it is not true. To my mind
The average American life is now notably worse than the average European life, in multiple ways. For the top 10% in the USA life is still absolutely fabulous, but that is the case in most parts of the world
I don’t agree with this. It’s certainly true for the bottom 30% or 40%.
It then gets progressively less true, depending precisely where in the US.
Looking at key metros, SF, LA and NYC are in certain respects quite dysfunctional such that unless you are in the top 10% or 5% you might be better off in Europe.
What is undeniably true is that there are vast swathes of Americans living in big houses with big cars, far away from poor people with all their problems, living incredibly comfortably.
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
My own view is that for people on median incomes, life is definitely better in the USA than it is here. But, for the poor, it's worse.
That used to be true, now it is not true. To my mind
The average American life is now notably worse than the average European life, in multiple ways. For the top 10% in the USA life is still absolutely fabulous, but that is the case in most parts of the world
I don’t agree with this. It’s certainly true for the bottom 30% or 40%.
It then gets progressively less true, depending precisely where in the US.
Looking at key metros, SF, LA and NYC are in certain respects quite dysfunctional such that unless you are in the top 10% or 5% you might be better off in Europe.
What is undeniably true is that there are vast swathes of Americans living in big houses with big cars, far away from poor people with all their problems, living incredibly comfortably.
It is better to be poor in western Europe, if you are middle income you earn more on average gdp per capita wise in the US than most European nations with a few exceptions like Switzerland and Norway but get no state healthcare. If you are rich you are better off in the US as you earn more, can afford private schools and healthcare and are taxed less (apart from maybe Switzerland)
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
My own view is that for people on median incomes, life is definitely better in the USA than it is here. But, for the poor, it's worse.
That used to be true, now it is not true. To my mind
The average American life is now notably worse than the average European life, in multiple ways. For the top 10% in the USA life is still absolutely fabulous, but that is the case in most parts of the world
I don’t agree with this. It’s certainly true for the bottom 30% or 40%.
It then gets progressively less true, depending precisely where in the US.
Looking at key metros, SF, LA and NYC are in certain respects quite dysfunctional such that unless you are in the top 10% or 5% you might be better off in Europe.
What is undeniably true is that there are vast swathes of Americans living in big houses with big cars, far away from poor people with all their problems, living incredibly comfortably.
Perhaps I am influenced by my recent road trip through the Deep South, which is a less happy part of America
But, I don't think I am. Here's one basic fact: Americans take on average 14 days of paid holiday a year. Europeans get 28 days or more
That might seem trivial, it really isn't. Holidays are what make life bearable for a lot of people in boring jobs. Plus Europeans can easily holiday in Europe
My locus is New York and New England, ie the most British bits.
Your holiday point is noted, but I’ve discovered that (middle class) New Yorkers at least have figured out how to buck this.
FPT. We're going to finish up with the energy providers de facto nationalised, aren't we? Just a question of how long it takes for all other options to be tried. May as well get on with it.
If you have a life essential where affordable supply, come what may, is far more important than choice, I think the case for some form of public ownership is strong.
Water? Not as if you can choose to be supplied by Severn Trent when Thames Water screw up, is it?
Is that the same Oxfordshire village that refused to allow a water reservoir to be built in their back yard?
Dim memory of the argument being about Abingdon area, from a friend living thereabouts - so I wouldn't have thought so (this is on the chalk downs, not the clay vale).
Nowhere near.
Apparently there have been "technical problems" at the small reservoir nearby to it. It's possible that it's dried out, but two factors make that raise more questions than answers: Farmoor reservoir (the largest one currently in Oxfordshire; a different reservoir) is at nearly 90% of capacity, and reservoirs shouldn't run down beyond about 20% due to algae blooms. Makes me wonder if some sort of plug was accidentally pulled.
Moreover, only half the village is out of water. Somehow, TW is only supplying that half of the village from that small reservoir; everywhere else is properly linked up (the village has had long-running problems).
Beyond that, we're getting into the argument about SESRO (reservoir) versus STT (Severn-Thames Transfer linking all the way to United Utilities).
SESRO: 15 yrs at least to build (assuming a megaproject like this comes in on schedule - this is a scale beyond any bunded reservoir ever attempted in the UK) plus at least two years to fill from the Thames (assuming the Thames has plentiful water for both years). Totally dependent on the Thames (so suceptible to single-region droughts), max water output of 290 Ml/day, numbers don't close to fulfil the criterion of avoiding rare droughts. Huge environmental impacts (it's a bad place to build a reservoir; the only justification is that many other places in the Thames Valley are even worse). On a floodplain, so would screw up towns and villages nearby in flood season. Would cause regular fogs over the A34. Unknown what the effects of flexing 150,000,000 tonnes on and off the clay floor of the Vale would be.
STT: 2-3 yrs to build (known and familiar technology). Immediately available once built. 300-500 Ml/day water output. Resilient to even two-region droughts, let alone a single-region drought. No disruption or environmental issues.
Thames Water don't want STT to come first, or even at all. Original plans were "we'll consider STT after 2080." With the 290Ml/day from SESRO, they say they may well not need it at all.
They've been forced to bring it forward to the 2050s. We want them to build STT first (far quicker, half the price, no disruption or environmental impact, drought resilience way beyond what is needed), and then see if a reservoir is needed afterwards. And, if so, where would be best for it with the greater reach.
Drawbacks to STT from Thames Water's point of view: not a valuable commercial asset, does not provide water they own and can sell on to Affinity Water and Southern Water. And if STT is built, they'll probably never get SESRO.
Interesting. STT can't be far off the line of the old Stroudwater and Thames-Severn Canals.
The Tavistock gender clinic is facing mass legal action from youngsters who claim they were rushed into taking life-altering puberty blockers.
Lawyers expect about 1,000 families to join a medical negligence lawsuit alleging vulnerable children have been misdiagnosed and placed on a damaging medical pathway.
They are accusing the gender identity development service [GIDS] at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust of multiple failures in its duty of care.
This includes allegations it recklessly prescribed puberty blockers with harmful side effects and adopted an “unquestioning, affirmative approach” to children identifying as transgender.
If you're in a seat that's been trending Conservative for several elections like Don Valley/Rother Valley/ Sedgefield, Bishop Auckland, the Stoke seats, you probably don't have much to worry about. These are all heading into the safe Conservative camp.
If you're in a seat that was just a fluke win, like Burnley, Leigh, you should be looking for another job.
If you're in a classic marginal, like Darlington, or High Peak, everything turns on the national state of play.
I like the clarity of the analysis though I don't fully agree. The trend may eventually secure your red wall seat by 2030, but losing Johnson / less Brexit agitation / energy bills could threaten any incumbent in particular. (There's a bigger conversation to have on PB about how long those trends will continue.)
I think the bigger issue in the first category of seats is that Labour, for a long time, punched above their socio-economic weight, because the memory of coal-mining was so strong. As the miners and ex-miners died off, thee seats moved rightwards at a rate of knots, as did (in earlier times) seats like Forest of Dean, NE Somerset, NW Leics. etc. Look at the swings to the Conservatives in these , since 1997, and they're in the high 20s, low 30s%.
And, mainly, the ex-mining seats are nice places to live. Housing is very affordable, relative to incomes, the cost of living is low, and the countryside is beautiful.
Countryside. The very nature of mine workings makes large areas of land unsuitable for building or farming. Plus you've got hills (slag heaps) and flashes where the workings have caved under rainfall to make lakes, on what was previously often a dull, flat landscape. Add 30 years to grow wild, and you've got some of the finest native habitats in England now.
There are a couple near us in W Yorkshire that are now RSPB nature reserves. Absolutely beautiful places. Housing nearby still cheap.
St Aidan's is a bit more than a flash though! What a stupid disaster that was. The River Aire apparently flowed backwards for a while...
The reserve near to us in the Flatlands has had breeding Black-winged stilts this year, which is quite a coup. Their Bitterns are a bit meh these days as they have colonised quite widely now.
Heh, just looked it up - I didn't know the history of its formation!. That was one of the two I was thinking of, the other being Fairburn Ings. You from around these parts, too?
Yes. Apparently I now live in a city...
I'm familiar with a lot of the local sites, so I guessed which ones you meant. Fairburn has done well - Spoonbills!
Donny will always be a town to me, I think. "City" doesn't feel right at all.
No, it doesn't at all. It is just another ego boost for some local politicians. It is clearly a market (and railway) town with some mining villages tagged on.
We've had a consultation from the council on whether we should be known as "City of Doncaster" or "Doncaster City". I'm going to vote for "Doncaster".
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
My own view is that for people on median incomes, life is definitely better in the USA than it is here. But, for the poor, it's worse.
That used to be true, now it is not true. To my mind
The average American life is now notably worse than the average European life, in multiple ways. For the top 10% in the USA life is still absolutely fabulous, but that is the case in most parts of the world
I don’t agree with this. It’s certainly true for the bottom 30% or 40%.
It then gets progressively less true, depending precisely where in the US.
Looking at key metros, SF, LA and NYC are in certain respects quite dysfunctional such that unless you are in the top 10% or 5% you might be better off in Europe.
What is undeniably true is that there are vast swathes of Americans living in big houses with big cars, far away from poor people with all their problems, living incredibly comfortably.
Perhaps I am influenced by my recent road trip through the Deep South, which is a less happy part of America
But, I don't think I am. Here's one basic fact: Americans take on average 14 days of paid holiday a year. Europeans get 28 days or more
That might seem trivial, it really isn't. Holidays are what make life bearable for a lot of people in boring jobs. Plus Europeans can easily holiday in Europe
My locus is New York and New England, ie the most British bits.
Your holiday point is noted, but I’ve discovered that (middle class) New Yorkers at least have figured out how to buck this.
Ideally, and basically, what you want is an American salary and tax, but you live in Europe. Try and sort it
If you're in a seat that's been trending Conservative for several elections like Don Valley/Rother Valley/ Sedgefield, Bishop Auckland, the Stoke seats, you probably don't have much to worry about. These are all heading into the safe Conservative camp.
If you're in a seat that was just a fluke win, like Burnley, Leigh, you should be looking for another job.
If you're in a classic marginal, like Darlington, or High Peak, everything turns on the national state of play.
I like the clarity of the analysis though I don't fully agree. The trend may eventually secure your red wall seat by 2030, but losing Johnson / less Brexit agitation / energy bills could threaten any incumbent in particular. (There's a bigger conversation to have on PB about how long those trends will continue.)
I think the bigger issue in the first category of seats is that Labour, for a long time, punched above their socio-economic weight, because the memory of coal-mining was so strong. As the miners and ex-miners died off, thee seats moved rightwards at a rate of knots, as did (in earlier times) seats like Forest of Dean, NE Somerset, NW Leics. etc. Look at the swings to the Conservatives in these , since 1997, and they're in the high 20s, low 30s%.
And, mainly, the ex-mining seats are nice places to live. Housing is very affordable, relative to incomes, the cost of living is low, and the countryside is beautiful.
Countryside. The very nature of mine workings makes large areas of land unsuitable for building or farming. Plus you've got hills (slag heaps) and flashes where the workings have caved under rainfall to make lakes, on what was previously often a dull, flat landscape. Add 30 years to grow wild, and you've got some of the finest native habitats in England now.
There are a couple near us in W Yorkshire that are now RSPB nature reserves. Absolutely beautiful places. Housing nearby still cheap.
St Aidan's is a bit more than a flash though! What a stupid disaster that was. The River Aire apparently flowed backwards for a while...
The reserve near to us in the Flatlands has had breeding Black-winged stilts this year, which is quite a coup. Their Bitterns are a bit meh these days as they have colonised quite widely now.
Heh, just looked it up - I didn't know the history of its formation!. That was one of the two I was thinking of, the other being Fairburn Ings. You from around these parts, too?
Yes. Apparently I now live in a city...
I'm familiar with a lot of the local sites, so I guessed which ones you meant. Fairburn has done well - Spoonbills!
Donny will always be a town to me, I think. "City" doesn't feel right at all.
No, it doesn't at all. It is just another ego boost for some local politicians. It is clearly a market (and railway) town with some mining villages tagged on.
We've had a consultation from the council on whether we should be known as "City of Doncaster" or "Doncaster City". I'm going to vote for "Doncaster".
I can’t believe “Doncaster City” is an option.
Makes it sound like a hick town in Texas where the oil wells have dried up,
If you're in a seat that's been trending Conservative for several elections like Don Valley/Rother Valley/ Sedgefield, Bishop Auckland, the Stoke seats, you probably don't have much to worry about. These are all heading into the safe Conservative camp.
If you're in a seat that was just a fluke win, like Burnley, Leigh, you should be looking for another job.
If you're in a classic marginal, like Darlington, or High Peak, everything turns on the national state of play.
I like the clarity of the analysis though I don't fully agree. The trend may eventually secure your red wall seat by 2030, but losing Johnson / less Brexit agitation / energy bills could threaten any incumbent in particular. (There's a bigger conversation to have on PB about how long those trends will continue.)
I think the bigger issue in the first category of seats is that Labour, for a long time, punched above their socio-economic weight, because the memory of coal-mining was so strong. As the miners and ex-miners died off, thee seats moved rightwards at a rate of knots, as did (in earlier times) seats like Forest of Dean, NE Somerset, NW Leics. etc. Look at the swings to the Conservatives in these , since 1997, and they're in the high 20s, low 30s%.
And, mainly, the ex-mining seats are nice places to live. Housing is very affordable, relative to incomes, the cost of living is low, and the countryside is beautiful.
Countryside. The very nature of mine workings makes large areas of land unsuitable for building or farming. Plus you've got hills (slag heaps) and flashes where the workings have caved under rainfall to make lakes, on what was previously often a dull, flat landscape. Add 30 years to grow wild, and you've got some of the finest native habitats in England now.
There are a couple near us in W Yorkshire that are now RSPB nature reserves. Absolutely beautiful places. Housing nearby still cheap.
St Aidan's is a bit more than a flash though! What a stupid disaster that was. The River Aire apparently flowed backwards for a while...
The reserve near to us in the Flatlands has had breeding Black-winged stilts this year, which is quite a coup. Their Bitterns are a bit meh these days as they have colonised quite widely now.
Heh, just looked it up - I didn't know the history of its formation!. That was one of the two I was thinking of, the other being Fairburn Ings. You from around these parts, too?
Yes. Apparently I now live in a city...
I'm familiar with a lot of the local sites, so I guessed which ones you meant. Fairburn has done well - Spoonbills!
You two are near me. My Dad lives in Fairburn.
I only found out about how St Aidan's was formed recently. I was 10 when it happened but I can't remember hearing anything at all about it. Mind you, we got Tyne Tees region tele because, apparently, the cooling towers at Ferrybridge C blocked the Yorkshire TV region signal from my house and quite a few surrounding. I always feel slightly remote from the rest of Yorkshire cos I grew up watching local news that told me about happenings in Peterlee and Gateshead. Same with BBC.
Heh, had a similar situation a few years ago in the south. Big bridge completely blocked the local transmitter, so we needed a big aerial pointing the other way, instead.
No problems with Ferrybridge now, I guess, for anyone still watching actual over the air telly...
Nope!
Just a possible lack of leccy due to under-investment in better replacements, particularly if gas is scarce this winter...
The Tavistock gender clinic is facing mass legal action from youngsters who claim they were rushed into taking life-altering puberty blockers.
Lawyers expect about 1,000 families to join a medical negligence lawsuit alleging vulnerable children have been misdiagnosed and placed on a damaging medical pathway.
They are accusing the gender identity development service [GIDS] at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust of multiple failures in its duty of care.
This includes allegations it recklessly prescribed puberty blockers with harmful side effects and adopted an “unquestioning, affirmative approach” to children identifying as transgender.
If you're in a seat that's been trending Conservative for several elections like Don Valley/Rother Valley/ Sedgefield, Bishop Auckland, the Stoke seats, you probably don't have much to worry about. These are all heading into the safe Conservative camp.
If you're in a seat that was just a fluke win, like Burnley, Leigh, you should be looking for another job.
If you're in a classic marginal, like Darlington, or High Peak, everything turns on the national state of play.
I like the clarity of the analysis though I don't fully agree. The trend may eventually secure your red wall seat by 2030, but losing Johnson / less Brexit agitation / energy bills could threaten any incumbent in particular. (There's a bigger conversation to have on PB about how long those trends will continue.)
I think the bigger issue in the first category of seats is that Labour, for a long time, punched above their socio-economic weight, because the memory of coal-mining was so strong. As the miners and ex-miners died off, thee seats moved rightwards at a rate of knots, as did (in earlier times) seats like Forest of Dean, NE Somerset, NW Leics. etc. Look at the swings to the Conservatives in these , since 1997, and they're in the high 20s, low 30s%.
And, mainly, the ex-mining seats are nice places to live. Housing is very affordable, relative to incomes, the cost of living is low, and the countryside is beautiful.
Countryside. The very nature of mine workings makes large areas of land unsuitable for building or farming. Plus you've got hills (slag heaps) and flashes where the workings have caved under rainfall to make lakes, on what was previously often a dull, flat landscape. Add 30 years to grow wild, and you've got some of the finest native habitats in England now.
There are a couple near us in W Yorkshire that are now RSPB nature reserves. Absolutely beautiful places. Housing nearby still cheap.
St Aidan's is a bit more than a flash though! What a stupid disaster that was. The River Aire apparently flowed backwards for a while...
The reserve near to us in the Flatlands has had breeding Black-winged stilts this year, which is quite a coup. Their Bitterns are a bit meh these days as they have colonised quite widely now.
Heh, just looked it up - I didn't know the history of its formation!. That was one of the two I was thinking of, the other being Fairburn Ings. You from around these parts, too?
Yes. Apparently I now live in a city...
I'm familiar with a lot of the local sites, so I guessed which ones you meant. Fairburn has done well - Spoonbills!
Donny will always be a town to me, I think. "City" doesn't feel right at all.
No, it doesn't at all. It is just another ego boost for some local politicians. It is clearly a market (and railway) town with some mining villages tagged on.
We've had a consultation from the council on whether we should be known as "City of Doncaster" or "Doncaster City". I'm going to vote for "Doncaster".
I can’t believe “Doncaster City” is an option.
Makes it sound like a hick town in Texas where the oil wells have dried up,
Well, substitute coal for oil and with the weather as it is, you might not be far off...
We only seem to do a good line in warehouses now. The Amazon sheds are *massive*.
Clare Grogan on Radio 2 has chosen Mmm-bop as one of the tracks of her years.
Was there anyone more gorgeous than Clare Grogan in the 1980s?
I am boycotting R2 after the Steve Wright sacking. Ken will be next!
In the 80's, Isabel Adjani ran her close.
Steve Wright has had a good run. I heard some interesting stuff about him (from one of his Radio 2 colleagues. He has been very astute about keeping his job this long.
FPT. We're going to finish up with the energy providers de facto nationalised, aren't we? Just a question of how long it takes for all other options to be tried. May as well get on with it.
If you have a life essential where affordable supply, come what may, is far more important than choice, I think the case for some form of public ownership is strong.
Water? Not as if you can choose to be supplied by Severn Trent when Thames Water screw up, is it?
Is that the same Oxfordshire village that refused to allow a water reservoir to be built in their back yard?
Dim memory of the argument being about Abingdon area, from a friend living thereabouts - so I wouldn't have thought so (this is on the chalk downs, not the clay vale).
Nowhere near.
Apparently there have been "technical problems" at the small reservoir nearby to it. It's possible that it's dried out, but two factors make that raise more questions than answers: Farmoor reservoir (the largest one currently in Oxfordshire; a different reservoir) is at nearly 90% of capacity, and reservoirs shouldn't run down beyond about 20% due to algae blooms. Makes me wonder if some sort of plug was accidentally pulled.
Moreover, only half the village is out of water. Somehow, TW is only supplying that half of the village from that small reservoir; everywhere else is properly linked up (the village has had long-running problems).
Beyond that, we're getting into the argument about SESRO (reservoir) versus STT (Severn-Thames Transfer linking all the way to United Utilities).
SESRO: 15 yrs at least to build (assuming a megaproject like this comes in on schedule - this is a scale beyond any bunded reservoir ever attempted in the UK) plus at least two years to fill from the Thames (assuming the Thames has plentiful water for both years). Totally dependent on the Thames (so suceptible to single-region droughts), max water output of 290 Ml/day, numbers don't close to fulfil the criterion of avoiding rare droughts. Huge environmental impacts (it's a bad place to build a reservoir; the only justification is that many other places in the Thames Valley are even worse). On a floodplain, so would screw up towns and villages nearby in flood season. Would cause regular fogs over the A34. Unknown what the effects of flexing 150,000,000 tonnes on and off the clay floor of the Vale would be.
STT: 2-3 yrs to build (known and familiar technology). Immediately available once built. 300-500 Ml/day water output. Resilient to even two-region droughts, let alone a single-region drought. No disruption or environmental issues.
Thames Water don't want STT to come first, or even at all. Original plans were "we'll consider STT after 2080." With the 290Ml/day from SESRO, they say they may well not need it at all.
They've been forced to bring it forward to the 2050s. We want them to build STT first (far quicker, half the price, no disruption or environmental impact, drought resilience way beyond what is needed), and then see if a reservoir is needed afterwards. And, if so, where would be best for it with the greater reach.
Drawbacks to STT from Thames Water's point of view: not a valuable commercial asset, does not provide water they own and can sell on to Affinity Water and Southern Water. And if STT is built, they'll probably never get SESRO.
Interesting. STT can't be far off the line of the old Stroudwater and Thames-Severn Canals.
One of the two options uses the canals and would restore them.
Option 2. It's a little more expensive, but would have huge positive externalities (the Cotswolds Canal Trust really want this to happen, and I don't blame them. People would love for this to be in their backyard. The exact reverse of "NIMBY"
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
Dick.
Equating helping the evil Russian invasion with aiding the noble Ukrainian defence is fucking stupid.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
They are/were firing missiles from Lukashenko's hovel. Seems only fair to receive some by return of post.
The Tavistock gender clinic is facing mass legal action from youngsters who claim they were rushed into taking life-altering puberty blockers.
Lawyers expect about 1,000 families to join a medical negligence lawsuit alleging vulnerable children have been misdiagnosed and placed on a damaging medical pathway.
They are accusing the gender identity development service [GIDS] at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust of multiple failures in its duty of care.
This includes allegations it recklessly prescribed puberty blockers with harmful side effects and adopted an “unquestioning, affirmative approach” to children identifying as transgender.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
The Belarusians have said the explosion at their airbase was an accident, and Ukraine is saying a lot less officially about that than the Crimean airbase, so the two aren't comparable. We had this with some previous attacks/accidents near Belgorod, where some were attacks and some were accidents. I think the Ukrainians have enough Russian targets in Ukraine to get into a mess by attacking targets in Belarus.
The main reason for Ukraine to keep tight-lipped about the Crimean attack is to avoid giving any info to the Russians that the Russians don't have about how the attack succeeded. This will be because the Ukrainians want to repeat the attack vector on a different target.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
The other possibility is that it was destroyed due to Russian incompetence.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
The Tavistock gender clinic is facing mass legal action from youngsters who claim they were rushed into taking life-altering puberty blockers.
Lawyers expect about 1,000 families to join a medical negligence lawsuit alleging vulnerable children have been misdiagnosed and placed on a damaging medical pathway.
They are accusing the gender identity development service [GIDS] at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust of multiple failures in its duty of care.
This includes allegations it recklessly prescribed puberty blockers with harmful side effects and adopted an “unquestioning, affirmative approach” to children identifying as transgender.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
Whereabouts roughly in Ukraine is your apartment? My Grandma was born in Ternopil, in the west, so I'm thinking of visiting after the war, see if I can find any ancestors in the graveyards, and have a look around.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
That’s a lot of money considering local wages.
Yes, the price of windows in Ukraine has doubled in the last six months - for some unknown reason.
Labour is 10% of the bill, but the supplier is finding it difficult to recruit people becuase the kids are all signing up to fight the war.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
Dick.
Equating helping the evil Russian invasion with aiding the noble Ukrainian defence is fucking stupid.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
The Belarusians have said the explosion at their airbase was an accident, and Ukraine is saying a lot less officially about that than the Crimean airbase, so the two aren't comparable. We had this with some previous attacks/accidents near Belgorod, where some were attacks and some were accidents. I think the Ukrainians have enough Russian targets in Ukraine to get into a mess by attacking targets in Belarus.
The main reason for Ukraine to keep tight-lipped about the Crimean attack is to avoid giving any info to the Russians that the Russians don't have about how the attack succeeded. This will be because the Ukrainians want to repeat the attack vector on a different target.
That would imply the Russians are less than 99.9% sure that it actually was the Ukrainians who did it, which they may well be.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
That’s a lot of money considering local wages.
Yes, the price of windows in Ukraine has doubled in the last six months - for some unknown reason.
Labour is 10% of the bill, but the supplier is finding it difficult to recruit people becuase the kids are all signing up to fight the war.
The last bit makes your post rather heartening. I mean, obviously it's terrible that they have to feel that that's their only option, but it's part of why Russia can't win this war. The Russians are having to bribe their poorest into fighting.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
If you're in a seat that's been trending Conservative for several elections like Don Valley/Rother Valley/ Sedgefield, Bishop Auckland, the Stoke seats, you probably don't have much to worry about. These are all heading into the safe Conservative camp.
If you're in a seat that was just a fluke win, like Burnley, Leigh, you should be looking for another job.
If you're in a classic marginal, like Darlington, or High Peak, everything turns on the national state of play.
Leigh is an oddity. Leigh itself, what you'd think of as Leigh, couldn't be more stereotypical Labour if it tried. It should be Liverpool - Walton levels of safe red.
But the areas around Leigh have long had some nice homes that the well off could go to. A fair number of former professional footballers etc around there, not exactly slumming. But the volume of new homes in the area around Leigh now being thrown up fast wouldn't be amiss in any other pleasant town that's safe Tory.
Its not wall to wall terraced houses anymore, if the Tories can keep a hold of the Barratt Homes style vote then a lot of voters in Leigh are now Barratt Homes style and not run down terraces, even though the terraces are still there. . The demographics are evolving even in Leigh. It might be a marginal of the future.
I'm astonished at Leigh, which is well within Greater Manchester.
I'd never have produced any analysis which would have shown it going blue - just look at how it voted landslide Labour in 1997.
The new housing estates all around Leigh that exist now didn't exist in 1997 though. Or even more recently. Take a drive around the new estates of Leigh, and its not the Leigh that I knew.
"Greater Manchester" is itself a bit of a misnomer anyway, after all Sir Graham Brady's postbox is in Greater Manchester too. Greater Manchester is more of a political construct than a real thing, I've never met anyone from Leigh who'd identify as being a Mancunian. if you told anyone in Leigh that they're in Manchester aside from the politics they'd laugh at you. If you tell them they're from Wigan, then you better have a good dentist.
In all reality, the ludicrous parochial northerner claim that virtually anyone would instinctively punch you in the face for daring to say they are from the next suburb of Greater Manchester is, of course, complete and utter mythology.
Oh you are fun, aren't you?
Of course people from Leigh won't actually punch you in the face for suggesting they're from Wigan, but the stereotype is there for a reason and has a grain of truth in it about the attitudes.
Leigh is far more in the shadow of being a part of Greater Wigan than Greater Manchester. Which is amusing, because Wigan itself is part of Greater Manchester but really doesn't feel like it, it feels like its own town just like Warrington is.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
Whereabouts roughly in Ukraine is your apartment? My Grandma was born in Ternopil, in the west, so I'm thinking of visiting after the war, see if I can find any ancestors in the graveyards, and have a look around.
Zhytomyr, about 100km west of Kiev. 4th March, the missile missed the town hall and hit the school next door - which thankfully was closed - and blew out the windows in both my apartment and my father-in-law’s apartment, 100m and 200m away.
After the war ends, tourists will be very much welcome, especially those with links to the area. Most of the youngsters speak English, find a student and pay them $100 a week to be your guide.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
The Belarusians have said the explosion at their airbase was an accident, and Ukraine is saying a lot less officially about that than the Crimean airbase, so the two aren't comparable. We had this with some previous attacks/accidents near Belgorod, where some were attacks and some were accidents. I think the Ukrainians have enough Russian targets in Ukraine to get into a mess by attacking targets in Belarus.
The main reason for Ukraine to keep tight-lipped about the Crimean attack is to avoid giving any info to the Russians that the Russians don't have about how the attack succeeded. This will be because the Ukrainians want to repeat the attack vector on a different target.
That would imply the Russians are less than 99.9% sure that it actually was the Ukrainians who did it, which they may well be.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
LOL. The Russians send missiles from Belarus into Ukraine, then complain like mad when a few go in the opposite direction. I just got the windows replaced in my apartment in Ukraine - $4k, thanks Putin for blowing them out.
That’s a lot of money considering local wages.
Yes, the price of windows in Ukraine has doubled in the last six months - for some unknown reason.
Labour is 10% of the bill, but the supplier is finding it difficult to recruit people becuase the kids are all signing up to fight the war.
The last bit makes your post rather heartening. I mean, obviously it's terrible that they have to feel that that's their only option, but it's part of why Russia can't win this war. The Russians are having to bribe their poorest into fighting.
Yes indeed. The Ukranians are fighting for their existential survival, and recruiting millions of young men to fight for it.
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
Most ordinary people can barely afford to visit London or New York for a couple of days, it's so expensive.
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
Dick.
Equating helping the evil Russian invasion with aiding the noble Ukrainian defence is fucking stupid.
Perhaps look up "equate" in a dictionary, before somebody "equates" your and Nigelb's attitude with Kenny Everett's:
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
Dick.
Equating helping the evil Russian invasion with aiding the noble Ukrainian defence is fucking stupid.
Perhaps look up "equate" in a dictionary, before somebody "equates" your and Nigelb's attitude with Kenny Everett's:
Keir was daft to make such a belt-and-braces promise to the membership. It reads like something from Michael Foot.
He is also daft to junk it, seemingly wholesale, when elements have never seemed more appropriate.
I wonder if there's some model of public ownership other than the typical nationalisation that he might go for. That way Labour can say they're not going to nationalise but will be able to claim they've kept their promise for some kind of public ownership. Maybe Government shareholders or something like that.
Contrary to what's often discussed or assumed on PB and elsewhere, Corbyn and McDonnell were in fact heading somewhere similar, possibly combined with a decentralised, mutualised-type option.
I disagree on that. Those two had fair too to much 'run by/controlled by the 'people' vibes'.
quotes like this: Labour pledged to bring energy, rail, water, and mail into public ownership and to put democratic management at the heart of how those industries are run.
That 'democratic management' part sends shudders down my spine about that that actually means.
or this 'In public hands, under democratic control, workforces and their unions will be the managers of this change, not its casualties.'
Although, overall, I'm a Milibandite rather than a Corbynite, I don't agree with this. Their general plan was for a loosened, co-operative-type approach to the utilities, which may or may not have worked, but isn't really the old hard left. The plan was to get the New Economics Foundation to draw it up, which is hardly an old-style, orthodox-hard-left outfiit.
"It is important to note that at the alternative models of ownership conference yesterday, McDonnell made clear that the plans do not attempt to emulate the nationalised industries of the past. Instead, it will promote the use of co-operatives."
Not surprising given the $'s exchange rate with any other currency...
Yes, good point. It must feel ridiculously cheap to them
They all seem very happy, I must say
An old friend of mine is back from California with his younger wife. Now abiding in the Thames Valley. She has never been to the UK before and absolutely adores it. Everyone tries to tell her this weather is not normal, but she is adamant it's not just the weather. She loves it in England - lack of crime, no guns, healthcare, history, the usual
I do wonder if we are going to see a migration of Americans to London/UK if American turbulence continues
It currently seems a race between US political collapse and British economic decline.
I know Americans eyeing the UK “if Trump wins again”, and Brits eyeing the US because the wage / tax / housing equation is generally more favourable (for the sort of people who might migrate).
Right now I'd say there is no contest in quality of life between Europe and the USA. Europe wins on virtually every metric, despite the tax stuff
And if I was an American with the necessary money I would move. Nick Clegg is right. And if the English language and a big world city is important to you, it has to be London
However Europe might be engulfed in civil strife, widespread famine, and terrible Putin-esque wars in about 6 weeks, and America will seem like a dreamland, so I'm going to hold off on a definitive call
My now-expert opinion is that London beats New York on most lifestyle metrics, except that as soon as you get outside of the densest parts of New York you have access to vast and wonderful landscape where commutable and LARGE property is very cheap by British standards.
Housing costs consume so much of British incomes.
Most ordinary people can barely afford to visit London or New York for a couple of days, it's so expensive.
London and New York City have more in common with each other than most of the rest of the UK and USA
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
Dick.
Equating helping the evil Russian invasion with aiding the noble Ukrainian defence is fucking stupid.
Perhaps look up "equate" in a dictionary, before somebody "equates" your and Nigelb's attitude with Kenny Everett's:
"The scheme has been warmly received by the Co-operative Party, which the shadow chancellor announced would be setting up an implementation group. The affiliated party has commissioned a report from the New Economics Foundation to look further into the practicalities of boosting the co-operative sector."
Latest news: there have been explosions at another airbase: this time in Belarus, at Zyabrouka, ~18 miles from the border with Ukraine.
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
The Belarusians have said the explosion at their airbase was an accident, and Ukraine is saying a lot less officially about that than the Crimean airbase, so the two aren't comparable. We had this with some previous attacks/accidents near Belgorod, where some were attacks and some were accidents. I think the Ukrainians have enough Russian targets in Ukraine to get into a mess by attacking targets in Belarus.
The main reason for Ukraine to keep tight-lipped about the Crimean attack is to avoid giving any info to the Russians that the Russians don't have about how the attack succeeded. This will be because the Ukrainians want to repeat the attack vector on a different target.
That would imply the Russians are less than 99.9% sure that it actually was the Ukrainians who did it, which they may well be.
The Russians are using 1960s maps to select targets and plan attacks. I don't have much belief in their competence to know what is going on.
FPT. We're going to finish up with the energy providers de facto nationalised, aren't we? Just a question of how long it takes for all other options to be tried. May as well get on with it.
If you have a life essential where affordable supply, come what may, is far more important than choice, I think the case for some form of public ownership is strong.
Water? Not as if you can choose to be supplied by Severn Trent when Thames Water screw up, is it?
Is that the same Oxfordshire village that refused to allow a water reservoir to be built in their back yard?
Dim memory of the argument being about Abingdon area, from a friend living thereabouts - so I wouldn't have thought so (this is on the chalk downs, not the clay vale).
Nowhere near.
Apparently there have been "technical problems" at the small reservoir nearby to it. It's possible that it's dried out, but two factors make that raise more questions than answers: Farmoor reservoir (the largest one currently in Oxfordshire; a different reservoir) is at nearly 90% of capacity, and reservoirs shouldn't run down beyond about 20% due to algae blooms. Makes me wonder if some sort of plug was accidentally pulled.
Moreover, only half the village is out of water. Somehow, TW is only supplying that half of the village from that small reservoir; everywhere else is properly linked up (the village has had long-running problems).
Beyond that, we're getting into the argument about SESRO (reservoir) versus STT (Severn-Thames Transfer linking all the way to United Utilities).
SESRO: 15 yrs at least to build (assuming a megaproject like this comes in on schedule - this is a scale beyond any bunded reservoir ever attempted in the UK) plus at least two years to fill from the Thames (assuming the Thames has plentiful water for both years). Totally dependent on the Thames (so suceptible to single-region droughts), max water output of 290 Ml/day, numbers don't close to fulfil the criterion of avoiding rare droughts. Huge environmental impacts (it's a bad place to build a reservoir; the only justification is that many other places in the Thames Valley are even worse). On a floodplain, so would screw up towns and villages nearby in flood season. Would cause regular fogs over the A34. Unknown what the effects of flexing 150,000,000 tonnes on and off the clay floor of the Vale would be.
STT: 2-3 yrs to build (known and familiar technology). Immediately available once built. 300-500 Ml/day water output. Resilient to even two-region droughts, let alone a single-region drought. No disruption or environmental issues.
Thames Water don't want STT to come first, or even at all. Original plans were "we'll consider STT after 2080." With the 290Ml/day from SESRO, they say they may well not need it at all.
They've been forced to bring it forward to the 2050s. We want them to build STT first (far quicker, half the price, no disruption or environmental impact, drought resilience way beyond what is needed), and then see if a reservoir is needed afterwards. And, if so, where would be best for it with the greater reach.
Drawbacks to STT from Thames Water's point of view: not a valuable commercial asset, does not provide water they own and can sell on to Affinity Water and Southern Water. And if STT is built, they'll probably never get SESRO.
Interesting. STT can't be far off the line of the old Stroudwater and Thames-Severn Canals.
One of the two options uses the canals and would restore them.
Option 2. It's a little more expensive, but would have huge positive externalities (the Cotswolds Canal Trust really want this to happen, and I don't blame them. People would love for this to be in their backyard. The exact reverse of "NIMBY"
Mm, that'd be like the way Telford's Pontcysyllte Aqueduct was latterly maintained primarily as a water supply feeder. I do hope it happens.
Edit: also presumably grants for the industrial archaeology bits. They'd never need to worry about keeping the summit level wet, either.
Did some fucker on here earlier, when discussing food, use the word "mouthfeel"?
Jesus H Christ.
Yep (not me). Texture, but more than that: interaction with flavour too.
It's why I cut up my potatoes for stovies* irregularly to get a range of sizes which vary from completely cooked and moistly pasty to al dente.
*potatoes, onions, and a little fat and water cooked in one pan - aka pommes de terre estovees, lobscouse, Labskaus (Danish), etc.
Or an "all in" as we used to call it.
Kidding it sounds very gourmet.
Basic Scots comfort food. Served with cold roast meat (lamb or pheasant for preference) and pickled beetroot. I was very surprised to order Labskaus in Copenhagen out of curiosity* and get this stuff straight from mum's kitchen.
*safer than in a Chinese place - got curried chicken feet once.
There is a video about today showing the sea launch of two Kaliber missiles, presumably from a submarine. Coincidence?
If Ukraine ends up with better air defence, it won't just be due to the kit they're using. It'll also be down to training, experience, intelligence and better integration of air defence with other assets.
Does anyone still think Russia is actually winning? (However you define 'winning' ...)
FPT. We're going to finish up with the energy providers de facto nationalised, aren't we? Just a question of how long it takes for all other options to be tried. May as well get on with it.
If you have a life essential where affordable supply, come what may, is far more important than choice, I think the case for some form of public ownership is strong.
Water? Not as if you can choose to be supplied by Severn Trent when Thames Water screw up, is it?
Is that the same Oxfordshire village that refused to allow a water reservoir to be built in their back yard?
Dim memory of the argument being about Abingdon area, from a friend living thereabouts - so I wouldn't have thought so (this is on the chalk downs, not the clay vale).
Nowhere near.
Apparently there have been "technical problems" at the small reservoir nearby to it. It's possible that it's dried out, but two factors make that raise more questions than answers: Farmoor reservoir (the largest one currently in Oxfordshire; a different reservoir) is at nearly 90% of capacity, and reservoirs shouldn't run down beyond about 20% due to algae blooms. Makes me wonder if some sort of plug was accidentally pulled.
Moreover, only half the village is out of water. Somehow, TW is only supplying that half of the village from that small reservoir; everywhere else is properly linked up (the village has had long-running problems).
Beyond that, we're getting into the argument about SESRO (reservoir) versus STT (Severn-Thames Transfer linking all the way to United Utilities).
SESRO: 15 yrs at least to build (assuming a megaproject like this comes in on schedule - this is a scale beyond any bunded reservoir ever attempted in the UK) plus at least two years to fill from the Thames (assuming the Thames has plentiful water for both years). Totally dependent on the Thames (so suceptible to single-region droughts), max water output of 290 Ml/day, numbers don't close to fulfil the criterion of avoiding rare droughts. Huge environmental impacts (it's a bad place to build a reservoir; the only justification is that many other places in the Thames Valley are even worse). On a floodplain, so would screw up towns and villages nearby in flood season. Would cause regular fogs over the A34. Unknown what the effects of flexing 150,000,000 tonnes on and off the clay floor of the Vale would be.
STT: 2-3 yrs to build (known and familiar technology). Immediately available once built. 300-500 Ml/day water output. Resilient to even two-region droughts, let alone a single-region drought. No disruption or environmental issues.
Thames Water don't want STT to come first, or even at all. Original plans were "we'll consider STT after 2080." With the 290Ml/day from SESRO, they say they may well not need it at all.
They've been forced to bring it forward to the 2050s. We want them to build STT first (far quicker, half the price, no disruption or environmental impact, drought resilience way beyond what is needed), and then see if a reservoir is needed afterwards. And, if so, where would be best for it with the greater reach.
Drawbacks to STT from Thames Water's point of view: not a valuable commercial asset, does not provide water they own and can sell on to Affinity Water and Southern Water. And if STT is built, they'll probably never get SESRO.
Interesting. STT can't be far off the line of the old Stroudwater and Thames-Severn Canals.
One of the two options uses the canals and would restore them.
Option 2. It's a little more expensive, but would have huge positive externalities (the Cotswolds Canal Trust really want this to happen, and I don't blame them. People would love for this to be in their backyard. The exact reverse of "NIMBY"
Both proposals are NIMBY, though. And end-of-pipe to boot.
Thames Water, where usage is significantly more than their peer UK regions per person (by 10% according to these numbers *), want to pull resources from the other side of the country rather than put their own house in order. They have not yet done even the low-hanging fruit such as metering, whilst eg Southern generally have.
And even the UK average household usage is 20-30% above places such as Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark.
All Red Wall (please not Redwall, it just makes me think of anthropomorphic mice) MPs panic? No. But without a turnaround, which will not be down to anything they personally do, many of them are going to lose their seats. Only question is if it is enough.
FPT. We're going to finish up with the energy providers de facto nationalised, aren't we? Just a question of how long it takes for all other options to be tried. May as well get on with it.
If you have a life essential where affordable supply, come what may, is far more important than choice, I think the case for some form of public ownership is strong.
Water? Not as if you can choose to be supplied by Severn Trent when Thames Water screw up, is it?
Is that the same Oxfordshire village that refused to allow a water reservoir to be built in their back yard?
Dim memory of the argument being about Abingdon area, from a friend living thereabouts - so I wouldn't have thought so (this is on the chalk downs, not the clay vale).
Nowhere near.
Apparently there have been "technical problems" at the small reservoir nearby to it. It's possible that it's dried out, but two factors make that raise more questions than answers: Farmoor reservoir (the largest one currently in Oxfordshire; a different reservoir) is at nearly 90% of capacity, and reservoirs shouldn't run down beyond about 20% due to algae blooms. Makes me wonder if some sort of plug was accidentally pulled.
Moreover, only half the village is out of water. Somehow, TW is only supplying that half of the village from that small reservoir; everywhere else is properly linked up (the village has had long-running problems).
Beyond that, we're getting into the argument about SESRO (reservoir) versus STT (Severn-Thames Transfer linking all the way to United Utilities).
SESRO: 15 yrs at least to build (assuming a megaproject like this comes in on schedule - this is a scale beyond any bunded reservoir ever attempted in the UK) plus at least two years to fill from the Thames (assuming the Thames has plentiful water for both years). Totally dependent on the Thames (so suceptible to single-region droughts), max water output of 290 Ml/day, numbers don't close to fulfil the criterion of avoiding rare droughts. Huge environmental impacts (it's a bad place to build a reservoir; the only justification is that many other places in the Thames Valley are even worse). On a floodplain, so would screw up towns and villages nearby in flood season. Would cause regular fogs over the A34. Unknown what the effects of flexing 150,000,000 tonnes on and off the clay floor of the Vale would be.
STT: 2-3 yrs to build (known and familiar technology). Immediately available once built. 300-500 Ml/day water output. Resilient to even two-region droughts, let alone a single-region drought. No disruption or environmental issues.
Thames Water don't want STT to come first, or even at all. Original plans were "we'll consider STT after 2080." With the 290Ml/day from SESRO, they say they may well not need it at all.
They've been forced to bring it forward to the 2050s. We want them to build STT first (far quicker, half the price, no disruption or environmental impact, drought resilience way beyond what is needed), and then see if a reservoir is needed afterwards. And, if so, where would be best for it with the greater reach.
Drawbacks to STT from Thames Water's point of view: not a valuable commercial asset, does not provide water they own and can sell on to Affinity Water and Southern Water. And if STT is built, they'll probably never get SESRO.
Interesting. STT can't be far off the line of the old Stroudwater and Thames-Severn Canals.
One of the two options uses the canals and would restore them.
Option 2. It's a little more expensive, but would have huge positive externalities (the Cotswolds Canal Trust really want this to happen, and I don't blame them. People would love for this to be in their backyard. The exact reverse of "NIMBY"
Both proposals are NIMBY, though. And end-of-pipe to boot.
Thames Water, where usage is significantly more than their peer UK regions per person (by 10% according to these numbers *), want to pull resources from the other side of the country rather than put their own house in order. They have not yet done even the low-hanging fruit such as metering, whilst eg Southern generally have.
And even the UK average household usage is 20-30% above places such as Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark.
They have to do all of that as well. The discussion included metering (they say they're up to 50% and want to go for more) and demand reduction (metering apparently reduces demand by an average of 12% without any other intervention as people see what they're using - I haven't had that number independently confirmed).
They also have to reduce leakage - they're amongst the worst and are leaking 605 Ml/day at the moment. The equivalent of two mega-reservoirs like SESRO.
United Utilities (the proposed source) are happy with the STT proposal (they are, after all, in the most water-plentiful area of the country, with six times the rainfall of the South East and have well over a hundred reservoirs of decent size already).
They're assuming they can get a demand reduction down to c. 110 litres per person per day (or at least that's the planning target). I'm going to believe it when I see it, but they do need to do that, and getting more metering out there will help by making adjustable tariffs possible.
Attack on the FBI building in Cincinnati: Interstate I71 North is shut down after suspect drove toward Waynesville Ohio. Unconfirmed reports say his now firing at police from a corn field. https://twitter.com/mynbc15/status/1557745287283736577
Attack on the FBI building in Cincinnati: Interstate I71 North is shut down after suspect drove toward Waynesville Ohio. Unconfirmed reports say his now firing at police from a corn field. https://twitter.com/mynbc15/status/1557745287283736577
FPT. We're going to finish up with the energy providers de facto nationalised, aren't we? Just a question of how long it takes for all other options to be tried. May as well get on with it.
If you have a life essential where affordable supply, come what may, is far more important than choice, I think the case for some form of public ownership is strong.
Water? Not as if you can choose to be supplied by Severn Trent when Thames Water screw up, is it?
Is that the same Oxfordshire village that refused to allow a water reservoir to be built in their back yard?
Dim memory of the argument being about Abingdon area, from a friend living thereabouts - so I wouldn't have thought so (this is on the chalk downs, not the clay vale).
Nowhere near.
Apparently there have been "technical problems" at the small reservoir nearby to it. It's possible that it's dried out, but two factors make that raise more questions than answers: Farmoor reservoir (the largest one currently in Oxfordshire; a different reservoir) is at nearly 90% of capacity, and reservoirs shouldn't run down beyond about 20% due to algae blooms. Makes me wonder if some sort of plug was accidentally pulled.
Moreover, only half the village is out of water. Somehow, TW is only supplying that half of the village from that small reservoir; everywhere else is properly linked up (the village has had long-running problems).
Beyond that, we're getting into the argument about SESRO (reservoir) versus STT (Severn-Thames Transfer linking all the way to United Utilities).
SESRO: 15 yrs at least to build (assuming a megaproject like this comes in on schedule - this is a scale beyond any bunded reservoir ever attempted in the UK) plus at least two years to fill from the Thames (assuming the Thames has plentiful water for both years). Totally dependent on the Thames (so suceptible to single-region droughts), max water output of 290 Ml/day, numbers don't close to fulfil the criterion of avoiding rare droughts. Huge environmental impacts (it's a bad place to build a reservoir; the only justification is that many other places in the Thames Valley are even worse). On a floodplain, so would screw up towns and villages nearby in flood season. Would cause regular fogs over the A34. Unknown what the effects of flexing 150,000,000 tonnes on and off the clay floor of the Vale would be.
STT: 2-3 yrs to build (known and familiar technology). Immediately available once built. 300-500 Ml/day water output. Resilient to even two-region droughts, let alone a single-region drought. No disruption or environmental issues.
Thames Water don't want STT to come first, or even at all. Original plans were "we'll consider STT after 2080." With the 290Ml/day from SESRO, they say they may well not need it at all.
They've been forced to bring it forward to the 2050s. We want them to build STT first (far quicker, half the price, no disruption or environmental impact, drought resilience way beyond what is needed), and then see if a reservoir is needed afterwards. And, if so, where would be best for it with the greater reach.
Drawbacks to STT from Thames Water's point of view: not a valuable commercial asset, does not provide water they own and can sell on to Affinity Water and Southern Water. And if STT is built, they'll probably never get SESRO.
Interesting. STT can't be far off the line of the old Stroudwater and Thames-Severn Canals.
One of the two options uses the canals and would restore them.
Option 2. It's a little more expensive, but would have huge positive externalities (the Cotswolds Canal Trust really want this to happen, and I don't blame them. People would love for this to be in their backyard. The exact reverse of "NIMBY"
Both proposals are NIMBY, though. And end-of-pipe to boot.
Thames Water, where usage is significantly more than their peer UK regions per person (by 10% according to these numbers *), want to pull resources from the other side of the country rather than put their own house in order. They have not yet done even the low-hanging fruit such as metering, whilst eg Southern generally have.
And even the UK average household usage is 20-30% above places such as Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark.
They have to do all of that as well. The discussion included metering (they say they're up to 50% and want to go for more) and demand reduction (metering apparently reduces demand by an average of 12% without any other intervention as people see what they're using - I haven't had that number independently confirmed).
They also have to reduce leakage - they're amongst the worst and are leaking 605 Ml/day at the moment. The equivalent of two mega-reservoirs like SESRO.
United Utilities (the proposed source) are happy with the STT proposal (they are, after all, in the most water-plentiful area of the country, with six times the rainfall of the South East and have well over a hundred reservoirs of decent size already).
They're assuming they can get a demand reduction down to c. 110 litres per person per day (or at least that's the planning target). I'm going to believe it when I see it, but they do need to do that, and getting more metering out there will help by making adjustable tariffs possible.
Good comments. Southern are up to 85% metered.
I'm inclined to think that if they get the transfer, then the rest might not happen.
One stat that is of interest is that according to TW, a fair minority of leaks are on the customer side, and will be detectible by "Smart Meters".
If you're in a seat that's been trending Conservative for several elections like Don Valley/Rother Valley/ Sedgefield, Bishop Auckland, the Stoke seats, you probably don't have much to worry about. These are all heading into the safe Conservative camp.
If you're in a seat that was just a fluke win, like Burnley, Leigh, you should be looking for another job.
If you're in a classic marginal, like Darlington, or High Peak, everything turns on the national state of play.
I like the clarity of the analysis though I don't fully agree. The trend may eventually secure your red wall seat by 2030, but losing Johnson / less Brexit agitation / energy bills could threaten any incumbent in particular. (There's a bigger conversation to have on PB about how long those trends will continue.)
I think the bigger issue in the first category of seats is that Labour, for a long time, punched above their socio-economic weight, because the memory of coal-mining was so strong. As the miners and ex-miners died off, thee seats moved rightwards at a rate of knots, as did (in earlier times) seats like Forest of Dean, NE Somerset, NW Leics. etc. Look at the swings to the Conservatives in these , since 1997, and they're in the high 20s, low 30s%.
And, mainly, the ex-mining seats are nice places to live. Housing is very affordable, relative to incomes, the cost of living is low, and the countryside is beautiful.
Countryside. The very nature of mine workings makes large areas of land unsuitable for building or farming. Plus you've got hills (slag heaps) and flashes where the workings have caved under rainfall to make lakes, on what was previously often a dull, flat landscape. Add 30 years to grow wild, and you've got some of the finest native habitats in England now.
There are a couple near us in W Yorkshire that are now RSPB nature reserves. Absolutely beautiful places. Housing nearby still cheap.
St Aidan's is a bit more than a flash though! What a stupid disaster that was. The River Aire apparently flowed backwards for a while...
The reserve near to us in the Flatlands has had breeding Black-winged stilts this year, which is quite a coup. Their Bitterns are a bit meh these days as they have colonised quite widely now.
Heh, just looked it up - I didn't know the history of its formation!. That was one of the two I was thinking of, the other being Fairburn Ings. You from around these parts, too?
Yes. Apparently I now live in a city...
I'm familiar with a lot of the local sites, so I guessed which ones you meant. Fairburn has done well - Spoonbills!
Donny will always be a town to me, I think. "City" doesn't feel right at all.
No, it doesn't at all. It is just another ego boost for some local politicians. It is clearly a market (and railway) town with some mining villages tagged on.
We've had a consultation from the council on whether we should be known as "City of Doncaster" or "Doncaster City". I'm going to vote for "Doncaster".
By 2055 every settlement in England & Wales will have been awarded city status. Except Reading obvs.
Just had someone explain to me that the FBI brought a “taint team” with them to MAL and that their job is to plant evidence. Um no. A taint team -aka a filter team- does not plant evidence. This person genuinely believes the FBI has an entire division https://twitter.com/NatSecJD/status/1557749211390689281
Just had someone explain to me that the FBI brought a “taint team” with them to MAL and that their job is to plant evidence. Um no. A taint team -aka a filter team- does not plant evidence. This person genuinely believes the FBI has an entire division https://twitter.com/NatSecJD/status/1557749211390689281
FPT. We're going to finish up with the energy providers de facto nationalised, aren't we? Just a question of how long it takes for all other options to be tried. May as well get on with it.
If you have a life essential where affordable supply, come what may, is far more important than choice, I think the case for some form of public ownership is strong.
Water? Not as if you can choose to be supplied by Severn Trent when Thames Water screw up, is it?
Is that the same Oxfordshire village that refused to allow a water reservoir to be built in their back yard?
Dim memory of the argument being about Abingdon area, from a friend living thereabouts - so I wouldn't have thought so (this is on the chalk downs, not the clay vale).
Nowhere near.
Apparently there have been "technical problems" at the small reservoir nearby to it. It's possible that it's dried out, but two factors make that raise more questions than answers: Farmoor reservoir (the largest one currently in Oxfordshire; a different reservoir) is at nearly 90% of capacity, and reservoirs shouldn't run down beyond about 20% due to algae blooms. Makes me wonder if some sort of plug was accidentally pulled.
Moreover, only half the village is out of water. Somehow, TW is only supplying that half of the village from that small reservoir; everywhere else is properly linked up (the village has had long-running problems).
Beyond that, we're getting into the argument about SESRO (reservoir) versus STT (Severn-Thames Transfer linking all the way to United Utilities).
SESRO: 15 yrs at least to build (assuming a megaproject like this comes in on schedule - this is a scale beyond any bunded reservoir ever attempted in the UK) plus at least two years to fill from the Thames (assuming the Thames has plentiful water for both years). Totally dependent on the Thames (so suceptible to single-region droughts), max water output of 290 Ml/day, numbers don't close to fulfil the criterion of avoiding rare droughts. Huge environmental impacts (it's a bad place to build a reservoir; the only justification is that many other places in the Thames Valley are even worse). On a floodplain, so would screw up towns and villages nearby in flood season. Would cause regular fogs over the A34. Unknown what the effects of flexing 150,000,000 tonnes on and off the clay floor of the Vale would be.
STT: 2-3 yrs to build (known and familiar technology). Immediately available once built. 300-500 Ml/day water output. Resilient to even two-region droughts, let alone a single-region drought. No disruption or environmental issues.
Thames Water don't want STT to come first, or even at all. Original plans were "we'll consider STT after 2080." With the 290Ml/day from SESRO, they say they may well not need it at all.
They've been forced to bring it forward to the 2050s. We want them to build STT first (far quicker, half the price, no disruption or environmental impact, drought resilience way beyond what is needed), and then see if a reservoir is needed afterwards. And, if so, where would be best for it with the greater reach.
Drawbacks to STT from Thames Water's point of view: not a valuable commercial asset, does not provide water they own and can sell on to Affinity Water and Southern Water. And if STT is built, they'll probably never get SESRO.
Interesting. STT can't be far off the line of the old Stroudwater and Thames-Severn Canals.
One of the two options uses the canals and would restore them.
Option 2. It's a little more expensive, but would have huge positive externalities (the Cotswolds Canal Trust really want this to happen, and I don't blame them. People would love for this to be in their backyard. The exact reverse of "NIMBY"
Both proposals are NIMBY, though. And end-of-pipe to boot.
Thames Water, where usage is significantly more than their peer UK regions per person (by 10% according to these numbers *), want to pull resources from the other side of the country rather than put their own house in order. They have not yet done even the low-hanging fruit such as metering, whilst eg Southern generally have.
And even the UK average household usage is 20-30% above places such as Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark.
They have to do all of that as well. The discussion included metering (they say they're up to 50% and want to go for more) and demand reduction (metering apparently reduces demand by an average of 12% without any other intervention as people see what they're using - I haven't had that number independently confirmed).
They also have to reduce leakage - they're amongst the worst and are leaking 605 Ml/day at the moment. The equivalent of two mega-reservoirs like SESRO.
United Utilities (the proposed source) are happy with the STT proposal (they are, after all, in the most water-plentiful area of the country, with six times the rainfall of the South East and have well over a hundred reservoirs of decent size already).
They're assuming they can get a demand reduction down to c. 110 litres per person per day (or at least that's the planning target). I'm going to believe it when I see it, but they do need to do that, and getting more metering out there will help by making adjustable tariffs possible.
Good comments. Southern are up to 85% metered.
I'm inclined to think that if they get the transfer, then the rest might not happen.
One stat that is of interest is that according to TW, a fair minority of leaks are on the customer side, and will be detectible by "Smart Meters".
I can well believe they'll avoid things if possible. One way to do it would be the regulator to mandate it (surprisingly, the TW people last night said they wanted that to happen and lamented that the regulator doesn't get involved enough. Given that it's in their own power, I'm wondering if there's some sort of internal argument going on).
The regulator could, with backup from Central Government, mandate that: - Metering should be increased at a certain rate - Leakage should be reduced at a specific rate
... and back it up with a limit on Board Member remuneration (by salary, bonus, dividends, share options) if not met in any given year.
We seem to have got almost all the leakage reduction achieved since privatisation in the first decade, with progress since the turn of the century seemingly near-stalled.
If we're going to have this setup, the regulator needs to be more involved, and to have some teeth. Otherwise, it's perfectly rational for TW and other companies to do the bare minimum in order to maximise their own profits and/or shareholder value.
Just had someone explain to me that the FBI brought a “taint team” with them to MAL and that their job is to plant evidence. Um no. A taint team -aka a filter team- does not plant evidence. This person genuinely believes the FBI has an entire division https://twitter.com/NatSecJD/status/1557749211390689281
Surely there comes a point where this is scaremongering though?
I'm not saying it's not 'possibly' true, and clearly something needs to be done but a lot of this could be doomcasting.
Arrived at work tonight to be told “we might have to shut the shop” last week the electric bill came in 10 x dearer today the gas came in, from £900 to £10,058.59 it’s a small family run business here since 1982 this would be tragic! 😢
Comments
quotes like this:
Labour pledged to bring energy, rail, water, and mail into public ownership and to put democratic management at the heart of how those industries are run.
That 'democratic management' part sends shudders down my spine about that that actually means.
or this
'In public hands, under democratic control, workforces and their unions will be the managers of this change, not its casualties.'
But, I don't think I am. Here's one basic fact: Americans take on average 14 days of paid holiday a year. Europeans get 28 days or more
https://www.benefitnews.com/news/should-the-u-s-have-the-same-pto-as-the-u-k-and-the-eu
That might seem trivial, it really isn't. Holidays are what make life bearable for a lot of people in boring jobs. Plus Europeans can easily holiday in Europe
Your holiday point is noted, but I’ve discovered that (middle class) New Yorkers at least have figured out how to buck this.
Lawyers expect about 1,000 families to join a medical negligence lawsuit alleging vulnerable children have been misdiagnosed and placed on a damaging medical pathway.
They are accusing the gender identity development service [GIDS] at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust of multiple failures in its duty of care.
This includes allegations it recklessly prescribed puberty blockers with harmful side effects and adopted an “unquestioning, affirmative approach” to children identifying as transgender.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4e7fc538-18dc-11ed-b1f4-627a202c7457?shareToken=2094256c4cd342d9271415fac611cd78
A fair few edge cases, then.
We've had a consultation from the council on whether we should be known as "City of Doncaster" or "Doncaster City". I'm going to vote for "Doncaster".
Makes it sound like a hick town in Texas where the oil wells have dried up,
What an evil place. I hope careers are ruined; indeed, this seems inevitable
We only seem to do a good line in warehouses now. The Amazon sheds are *massive*.
Option 2. It's a little more expensive, but would have huge positive externalities (the Cotswolds Canal Trust really want this to happen, and I don't blame them. People would love for this to be in their backyard. The exact reverse of "NIMBY"
All these anonymous military attacks by presumed state actors! Eastern Europe is getting like the Gulf!
Those who punch the air and say this is utterly legitimate because the Belarusian government has been helping the Russian side should recall that other countries (including Poland and Britain) have been helping the Ukrainian side. Anybody who wants this war to escalate is a maniac.
What is the reason why the Ukrainian government hasn't claimed responsibility for the attack on Saki airbase in the Crimea? I realise they are claiming responsibility "between the lines" to their home market and their supporters abroad, but why haven't they said so explicitly? A highly successful surprise raid, on a military target, with presumably none of your own guys lost or captured? You'd have thought the optics were great.
I don't know the answer to the question, but the absence of a "we did it" claim might be so that the Ukrainian government can keep its oar in in the psychological warfare relating to last week's shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which looks as though it will be on the agenda at today's UNSC meeting.
Another possibility is that it wasn't the Ukrainians who attacked Saki, but someone else...and I don't mean Ukrainian nationalist partisans in the Crimea (all three of them) acting off their own bat.
Equating helping the evil Russian invasion with aiding the noble Ukrainian defence is fucking stupid.
Maybe the ideologues in charge might face personal consequences in this case - certainly those professionally qualified need to be struck off.
The main reason for Ukraine to keep tight-lipped about the Crimean attack is to avoid giving any info to the Russians that the Russians don't have about how the attack succeeded. This will be because the Ukrainians want to repeat the attack vector on a different target.
Labour is 10% of the bill, but the supplier is finding it difficult to recruit people becuase the kids are all signing up to fight the war.
Of course people from Leigh won't actually punch you in the face for suggesting they're from Wigan, but the stereotype is there for a reason and has a grain of truth in it about the attitudes.
Leigh is far more in the shadow of being a part of Greater Wigan than Greater Manchester. Which is amusing, because Wigan itself is part of Greater Manchester but really doesn't feel like it, it feels like its own town just like Warrington is.
After the war ends, tourists will be very much welcome, especially those with links to the area. Most of the youngsters speak English, find a student and pay them $100 a week to be your guide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn2oisrDclc
Jesus H Christ.
https://twitter.com/shadsy/status/1557720455930269697?t=D210TBNMf9KHFBRX0tCWWw&s=09
https://twitter.com/Mark_J_Harper/status/1557319197159481345?s=20&t=LLfCQvyTHcNVAYaqaJ3-Cg
In fact the only living former Tory leader backing Truss is IDS (though am sure Boris is too)
The plan was to get the New Economics Foundation to draw it up, which is hardly an old-style, orthodox-hard-left outfiit.
"It is important to note that at the alternative models of ownership conference yesterday, McDonnell made clear that the plans do not attempt to emulate the nationalised industries of the past. Instead, it will promote the use of co-operatives."
"The scheme has been warmly received by the Co-operative Party, which the shadow chancellor announced would be setting up an implementation group. The affiliated party has commissioned a report from the New Economics Foundation to look further into the practicalities of boosting the co-operative sector."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economics_Foundation
It's why I cut up my potatoes for stovies* irregularly to get a range of sizes which vary from completely cooked and moistly pasty to al dente.
*potatoes, onions, and a little fat and water cooked in one pan - aka pommes de terre estovees, lobscouse, Labskaus (Danish), etc.
https://www.google.com/search?client=avast-a-2&q=mouthfeel&oq=mouthfeel&aqs=avast..69i57j0l7.1634j0j9&ie=UTF-8
Perhaps out of California?
Kidding it sounds very gourmet.
Edit: also presumably grants for the industrial archaeology bits. They'd never need to worry about keeping the summit level wet, either.
2 Russian Kalibr cruise missiles shot down in Kharkiv Oblast - Ukraine's Air Force Command
The Command says that Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile units destroyed two Kalibrs launched from the Black Sea at about 13:30 today.
https://twitter.com/euromaidanpress/status/1557744378059272192
*safer than in a Chinese place - got curried chicken feet once.
Like my Gran used to make...
If Ukraine ends up with better air defence, it won't just be due to the kit they're using. It'll also be down to training, experience, intelligence and better integration of air defence with other assets.
Does anyone still think Russia is actually winning? (However you define 'winning' ...)
You're not turning again are you???
Thames Water, where usage is significantly more than their peer UK regions per person (by 10% according to these numbers *), want to pull resources from the other side of the country rather than put their own house in order. They have not yet done even the low-hanging fruit such as metering, whilst eg Southern generally have.
And even the UK average household usage is 20-30% above places such as Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark.
* Source and I would love to see something more recent: https://waterwise.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/WWT-Report-.pdf
I am told.
I once had 'deconstructed stovies' in a restaurant. It was as bad as it sounds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITnXpdocltQ
*ducks*
The discussion included metering (they say they're up to 50% and want to go for more) and demand reduction (metering apparently reduces demand by an average of 12% without any other intervention as people see what they're using - I haven't had that number independently confirmed).
They also have to reduce leakage - they're amongst the worst and are leaking 605 Ml/day at the moment. The equivalent of two mega-reservoirs like SESRO.
United Utilities (the proposed source) are happy with the STT proposal (they are, after all, in the most water-plentiful area of the country, with six times the rainfall of the South East and have well over a hundred reservoirs of decent size already).
They're assuming they can get a demand reduction down to c. 110 litres per person per day (or at least that's the planning target). I'm going to believe it when I see it, but they do need to do that, and getting more metering out there will help by making adjustable tariffs possible.
Interstate I71 North is shut down after suspect drove toward Waynesville Ohio. Unconfirmed reports say his now firing at police from a corn field.
https://twitter.com/mynbc15/status/1557745287283736577
https://twitter.com/HRwritesnews/status/1557750323166445569
Europe’s Energy Crisis May Get a Lot Worse
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/10/opinion/europe-energy-crisis-ukraine.html
I'm inclined to think that if they get the transfer, then the rest might not happen.
One stat that is of interest is that according to TW, a fair minority of leaks are on the customer side, and will be detectible by "Smart Meters".
Sorry.
You spared us more mouthfeel.
Good job.
Like he never existed.
Just had someone explain to me that the FBI brought a “taint team” with them to MAL and that their job is to plant evidence. Um no. A taint team -aka a filter team- does not plant evidence. This person genuinely believes the FBI has an entire division
https://twitter.com/NatSecJD/status/1557749211390689281
For those unfamiliar with the term:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taint_(legal)
I'm not saying it's not 'possibly' true, and clearly something needs to be done but a lot of this could be doomcasting.
The regulator could, with backup from Central Government, mandate that:
- Metering should be increased at a certain rate
- Leakage should be reduced at a specific rate
... and back it up with a limit on Board Member remuneration (by salary, bonus, dividends, share options) if not met in any given year.
We seem to have got almost all the leakage reduction achieved since privatisation in the first decade, with progress since the turn of the century seemingly near-stalled.
If we're going to have this setup, the regulator needs to be more involved, and to have some teeth. Otherwise, it's perfectly rational for TW and other companies to do the bare minimum in order to maximise their own profits and/or shareholder value.
Nadine, for example, is a pallid facsimile of MTG.
#fuelcrisis #Aberdeen https://twitter.com/NatalieAHood/status/1555946745774866440/photo/1