This is just bizarre given the US commitment to freedom of speech.
Public-University Curricula Are ‘Government Speech,’ Florida Says https://www.chronicle.com/article/public-university-curricula-are-government-speech-florida-says The state of Florida asserted on Friday that faculty members’ curriculum and in-class instruction at public universities is “government speech” and “not the speech of the educators themselves.” Therefore, such expression is fair game to be regulated by state lawmakers.
“A public university’s curriculum is set by the university in accordance with the strictures and guidance of the State’s elected officials,” lawyers for the state wrote in a court filing. “It is government speech.”…
This is Orbanism.
Trump and the religious right caused the US to go mad. This is just another twitch of the Trumpist corpse.
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
IMO, the selectorate will not put an Indian in No.10
They nearly did already.
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
This feels worse than Black Wednesday back in 1992 (showin' my age)... it seems entirely self inflicted - who will go first Governor of Bank of England o KK?
Truss. I recall many on here telling me she’d surprise on the upside? In truth, I had thought she wouldn’t go through with most of the stuff she spouted.
I have not been surprised. It was always clear to me that she/they were interested in power & patronage, not governance.
I don't think that's quite right. Rather, I think Britannia Unchained is similar to Brexit in that a bunch of half-digested ideas from years gone by have been sitting on the shelf waiting for their authors to achieve power.
Liz Truss did show during the leadership campaign some willingness to ditch proposals that seemed unpopular and/or impracticable. Let us hope this continues. It is not to her credit that they got as far as needing to be dropped.
This is just bizarre given the US commitment to freedom of speech.
Public-University Curricula Are ‘Government Speech,’ Florida Says https://www.chronicle.com/article/public-university-curricula-are-government-speech-florida-says The state of Florida asserted on Friday that faculty members’ curriculum and in-class instruction at public universities is “government speech” and “not the speech of the educators themselves.” Therefore, such expression is fair game to be regulated by state lawmakers.
“A public university’s curriculum is set by the university in accordance with the strictures and guidance of the State’s elected officials,” lawyers for the state wrote in a court filing. “It is government speech.”…
This is Orbanism.
Trump and the religious right caused the US to go mad. This is just another twitch of the Trumpist corpse.
If only. It’s a corpse which could win the next election, and controls at least part of the Supreme Court.
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
No chance at all IMO. The next election will be Truss vs Starmer in 2024.
Conservative Party conference runs 2-5 October, less than a week away. Conservatives from around the country will meet in Birmingham and will inevitably spend their four days comparing notes on how well or badly the new regime is doing.
At least we won’t have another ERM fiasco because, erm, apparently we don’t have enough foreign reserves to even attempt supporting the currency the good old fashioned way.
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
No chance at all IMO. The next election will be Truss vs Starmer in 2024.
Conservative Party conference runs 2-5 October, less than a week away. Conservatives from around the country will meet in Birmingham and will inevitably spend their four days comparing notes on how well or badly the new regime is doing.
I’m tempted to go along and hand out free abacuses.
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
IMO, the selectorate will not put an Indian in No.10
They nearly did already.
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
If LizT is replaced before the next general election, it is unlikely the men in grey suits will want to repeat last summer's members' vote (and six weeks of blue on blue attacks). Either there will be a coronation of an unopposed candidate or the selectorate will be MPs only.
This feels worse than Black Wednesday back in 1992 (showin' my age)... it seems entirely self inflicted - who will go first Governor of Bank of England o KK?
Truss. I recall many on here telling me she’d surprise on the upside? In truth, I had thought she wouldn’t go through with most of the stuff she spouted.
I have not been surprised. It was always clear to me that she/they were interested in power & patronage, not governance.
I don't think that's quite right. Rather, I think Britannia Unchained is similar to Brexit in that a bunch of half-digested ideas from years gone by have been sitting on the shelf waiting for their authors to achieve power.
Liz Truss did show during the leadership campaign some willingness to ditch proposals that seemed unpopular and/or impracticable. Let us hope this continues. It is not to her credit that they got as far as needing to be dropped.
As far as I can tell, Ms Truss has no actual political principles. She just jumps on whatever bandwagon that will move her upwards to where she can shine in glory for all to admire.
The only difference between her and Boris seems to be that he wants to rake in money and she wants to rake in adoration. Neither of them are any use to the rest of us.
Can we all hope and pray this finally puts a nail in the coffin of both the daily Mail and express? And the scores of rabid right wingers like Redwood and co who seem to cheer this lunacy on
Can we all hope and pray this finally puts a nail in the coffin of both the daily Mail and express? And the scores of rabid right wingers like Redwood and co who seem to cheer this lunacy on
Not a chance. The Mail and the Express will blame it on either saboteurs or the fact that the govt did not swing far enough to the right. They will never blame themselves or the politicians they promote
Can we all hope and pray this finally puts a nail in the coffin of both the daily Mail and express? And the scores of rabid right wingers like Redwood and co who seem to cheer this lunacy on
What lunacy are you talking about — getting rid of the 45% income tax bracket?
Tumbling gas prices on track to slash £60bn cost of energy bailout Successful efforts to fill gas storage could halve prices by early next year
Britain's energy bills freeze could prove much less costly than feared by early next year, as City forecasters predict that gas prices will plunge this winter following a successful scramble across Europe to fill reserves.
The budget was bad enough, but the total absence of the publication of independent forecasts to go with it is what has made it ten times worse. In their absence the markets are just drawing their own conclusions about what they must say...
The budget was bad enough, but the total absence of the publication of independent forecasts to go with it is what has made it ten times worse. In their absence the markets are just drawing their own conclusions about what they must say...
Also Kwarteng’s comments (in effect) that the Govt has no role to play in reducing inflation and that’s all on the BoE (with the limited tools it has available), even if Govt policy is actively working against them.
(although (with hindsight?) it is clear that the BoE was behind the curve and should have been more aggressive a long time ago...)
I'm not sure Truss has the votes to get her budget through unless she changes tack.
A small minority of MPs went for her, and she's appointed nothing but her friends to Government.
How much of it requires primary legislation? The short-time frame for things like the National insurance change (which is presumably a bit more complicated as an in-year change) means that payroll systems etc will be being provisionally updated much in advance of any legislation being passed).
Must be two schools of thought amongst Tory MPs Those who actively want this nonsense Those who assumed Truss would be a touch looser fiscally than Sunak but might have half an eye on keeping Britain solvent.
"the Govt has no role to play in reducing inflation"
I assume Bailey, and I'm no fan, guessed the government might follow a sane fiscal plan ?
Even, still, inflation was running hot even before the latest blowup. Problem I guess is that the BoE remit these days (from memory) has arguably contradictory objectives these days and they have spent too long concentrating on the bits that don’t involve control of inflation. Bits that the Govt should have been taking greater responsibility for.
One little thing that I (inexpert that I am) always thought would come back to bite was the Osborne “trick” of banking the interest that BoE earned on Govt bonds (under QE) back to the Treasury. Now BoE is seeking to unwind the size of its balance sheet isn’t that now an extra cost that the Govt is facing? (or was that always a backward looking thing not accounted for in future forecasts - the banking of the interest?).
Must be two schools of thought amongst Tory MPs Those who actively want this nonsense Those who assumed Truss would be a touch looser fiscally than Sunak but might have half an eye on keeping Britain solvent.
Most likely thing is Truss sets out a plan to keep Britain solvent in the next few days and submits to the OBR, and others, for scrutiny.
But, she's also very obstinate and probably thinks the markets are wrong so I wouldn't bet on that.
I'm not sure Truss has the votes to get her budget through unless she changes tack.
A small minority of MPs went for her, and she's appointed nothing but her friends to Government.
It is an interesting exercise in seeing how far party loyalty can go. If we ignore the collateral damage.
How does this compare with the early Thatcher experiment with monetarism? Didn’t she change tack pretty quickly then?
It’s a shame that so many conclusions were drawn from Johnson’s ouster than the right one. That, politically, the problem was fundamentally Johnson himself, and by extension his style of Govt. Not actually his policies. Nothing in Johnson’s collapse in the polls and subsequent removal necessitated a complete 180 in Govt political philosophy and policy. The quote above about Truss abandoning a platform that brought a majority of 80 to pursue the seven libertarian voters in the country is telling.
So it looks like Italy has elected a female Farage as its new PM and will rely on Berlusconi, the Italian Boris, to be the moderate influence in the rightwing coalition government between Brothers of Italy, Lega Nord and Forza Italia. Except on Ukraine of course where Meloni is the most anti Putin leader of the 3 right of centre parties
Although Sky Italy was just pointing out that Brothers of Italy and the Lega might have an overall majority between them without Berlusconi's party.
The projection is all 3 parties are needed, LN/ FdI is about 178, 22 short.
Looking at Greater Naples, aka Campania 01. M5S were predicted not to get a single constituency seat by most prior models, but they've nationally gone from 11% to the 16% where they were just on the cusp of sneaking the odd one, to the point where they look like winning 5 or possibly 6 of the 7 Greater Naples constituencies on 45% of the vote.
Mostly taken from the centre right.
From the Sky predicted 29 M5S/27 Left/25 Right in Fuorigrotta, the actual count. around halfway, sits at 40 / 24/ 21 to M5S - Di Maio is being trounced.
Will be a small but potentially useful bite out of the arse of Meloni's majority.
Selected regional constituency picture has ended up:
M5S to win all 7 Greater Naples seats (the electoral commission has confirmed 4 with all boxes counted. but most other seats are at 99% + of boxes counted) Emilia: Right 7 seats. Left 3 seats, Carpi still tctc going into last boxes (left lead) Tuscany: Right 7 seats. Left 2 seats
I'm not sure Truss has the votes to get her budget through unless she changes tack.
A small minority of MPs went for her, and she's appointed nothing but her friends to Government.
It is an interesting exercise in seeing how far party loyalty can go. If we ignore the collateral damage.
I'm not seeing how this Budget is sold in Tory held Red wall seats - which arent known for their high rate tax payers, whilst the sting is taken out of gas, a collapsing pound will drive up fuel costs and the optics of frozen NHS /[public sector pay whilst millionaires do very nicely wont go down well at all
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
IMO, the selectorate will not put an Indian in No.10
They nearly did already.
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
One thing is, I think the parliamentary party can probably ignore the rights of the members with impunity. On the one hand it's a clear breach of contract to deprive them of their rights under the rules to elect new leaders, on the other, the courts are pretty much bound to say It's above our pay grade to say who is Prime Minister.
Must be two schools of thought amongst Tory MPs Those who actively want this nonsense Those who assumed Truss would be a touch looser fiscally than Sunak but might have half an eye on keeping Britain solvent.
The biggest school of thought- getting on for seventy percent of MPs- was that someone else would be better.
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
IMO, the selectorate will not put an Indian in No.10
They nearly did already.
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
One thing is, I think the parliamentary party can probably ignore the rights of the members with impunity. On the one hand it's a clear breach of contract to deprive them of their rights under the rules to elect new leaders, on the other, the courts are pretty much bound to say It's above our pay grade to say who is Prime Minister.
VoNC. Out by Friday. Nothing to do with the courts whatsoever. And even if under some far fetched theory the members had rights over who is Tory leader, they have no say in who is Prime Minister.
£ seems to have recovered/stabilised a little bit (profit taking?). I wonder how much the current value is pricing in a near immediate Govt or BoE response though... If there are no statements forthcoming today, they may go in again...
One question is whether any other countries/central banks have interests in helping out the £ if BoE is unable. (Global financial stability? Impact on the city?). Or can they afford to just let the £ swing?
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
IMO, the selectorate will not put an Indian in No.10
They nearly did already.
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
One thing is, I think the parliamentary party can probably ignore the rights of the members with impunity. On the one hand it's a clear breach of contract to deprive them of their rights under the rules to elect new leaders, on the other, the courts are pretty much bound to say It's above our pay grade to say who is Prime Minister.
VoNC. Out by Friday. Nothing to do with the courts whatsoever. And even if under some far fetched theory the members had rights over who is Tory leader, they have no say in who is Prime Minister.
It's not a far fetched theory, it is basic contract law. And a vonc gets her out, it says nothing about who replaces her.
£ seems to have recovered/stabilised a little bit (profit taking?). I wonder how much the current value is pricing in a near immediate Govt or BoE response though... If there are no statements forthcoming today, they may go in again...
One question is whether any other countries/central banks have interests in helping out the £ if BoE is unable. (Global financial stability? Impact on the city?). Or can they afford to just let the £ swing?
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
IMO, the selectorate will not put an Indian in No.10
They nearly did already.
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
One thing is, I think the parliamentary party can probably ignore the rights of the members with impunity. On the one hand it's a clear breach of contract to deprive them of their rights under the rules to elect new leaders, on the other, the courts are pretty much bound to say It's above our pay grade to say who is Prime Minister.
VoNC. Out by Friday. Nothing to do with the courts whatsoever. And even if under some far fetched theory the members had rights over who is Tory leader, they have no say in who is Prime Minister.
It's not a far fetched theory, it is basic contract law. And a vonc gets her out, it says nothing about who replaces her.
The rules are set by the 1922 committee. My point was that they might have elected her leader now. They have no legal/contractual right to prevent her removal.
The sinking currency is making the govt energy plan more expensive by the minute
And they’re going to have to pay through the nose to borrow the money to pay for it.
Presume that was the point of the comment!
No. It would still be true if they were paying out of a cash surplus with no borrowing required.
Can you expand. I know $ denominated oil becomes more expensive. But how much is gas/ electricity cost linked to imports, as opposed to internally produced? I presume your implication is a chunk of the former?
We’ve substituted government by second year university students for government by right-wing think tanks with dodgy funding. Neither has any connection to the real world.
I think there must be a reasonable chance already of an early ouster of Truss and a coronation of Rishi.
IMO, the selectorate will not put an Indian in No.10
They nearly did already.
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
One thing is, I think the parliamentary party can probably ignore the rights of the members with impunity. On the one hand it's a clear breach of contract to deprive them of their rights under the rules to elect new leaders, on the other, the courts are pretty much bound to say It's above our pay grade to say who is Prime Minister.
VoNC. Out by Friday. Nothing to do with the courts whatsoever. And even if under some far fetched theory the members had rights over who is Tory leader, they have no say in who is Prime Minister.
It's not a far fetched theory, it is basic contract law. And a vonc gets her out, it says nothing about who replaces her.
The rules are set by the 1922 committee. My point was that they might have elected her leader now. They have no legal/contractual right to prevent her removal.
No they are not, they are contained in the party rules. The 1922 Committee is responsible for the procedures by which those rules are put into effect, it has no power to - for instance - say This time we will make it MPs only.
I didn't say they had a right to prevent her removal.
They are disproportionately recruiting ethnic minorities, including Avars from Dagestan, Tatars from Crimea, Ukrainians from the occupied territories. The point is to deliberately channel them into the mean grinder. This is ethnic cleansing on a massive scale.
Coming to this a bit late, but re the BBC and the funeral.
This was a state funeral paid for by the state ie by us. Ditto the accession councils and all the rest of it. The BBC is funded by those who pay the license fee. This was not a private matter and the BBC was not hired by the RF like some wedding photographer. So the entire film of the occasion is a historic archive not the private property of the monarchy.
I very much hope the BBC (and, if necessary, the government) tell the monarchy to get stuffed if they try to limit access or use. This sort of arrogance is what will do for the monarchy.
Yes and the BBC filmed the funeral and accession council and lying in state live and in full.
However the archive is an entirely different matter, as it was also a funeral of a member of the royal family they get a say on how much of it broadcasters can store and use
Nonsense. If I filmed part of the funeral, that film belongs to me and the RF has no right to determine what I store and how I use it. No different for the BBC.
The RF cannot have their cake and eat it. This was a public historic and state event. The private family part of it was not filmed for the public. The RF have no right to determine what happens to films made of them in the public domain.
I suspect they want to have an “official” DVD made in partnership with the BBC… all proceeds to restoring the palaces (so effectively tax payers). But they can’t say that as it seems so grubby
The sinking currency is making the govt energy plan more expensive by the minute
And they’re going to have to pay through the nose to borrow the money to pay for it.
Presume that was the point of the comment!
No. It would still be true if they were paying out of a cash surplus with no borrowing required.
Can you expand. I know $ denominated oil becomes more expensive. But how much is gas/ electricity cost linked to imports, as opposed to internally produced? I presume your implication is a chunk of the former?
LNG priced in $ (as with oil, even if produced here). Electricity national pricing I do not understand, but is dependent on global lng price
I didn't know until the weekend that Odey used to actually employ Kwarteng himself, or how many Truss backers made shorting fortunes on Friday. The employment of Kwarteng was also actually before he was one of the key financial figures in setting up Vote Leave, too, it seems.
According to various sources Odey has pocketed a tidy 145 million in the last couple of days,..
There are no good options for the Tories from here. The only question now is, can Labour win an overall majority? I think they can, even without a big recovery in Scotland.
The sinking currency is making the govt energy plan more expensive by the minute
The one funded by borrowing? Alongside the tax cuts funded by borrowing.. etc
Just sounds bizarre for a conservative government
In a way, it’s worse than Corbyn. At least he would have intended to spend the money on useful things even if in practice most of it probably would have ended up in his supporters’ pockets.
The market reaction this week was always going to be much more important than the immediate reaction on Friday because the weekend has been a time to look in more detail at the government’s plans and strategy. Whatever our politics, we all have to hope there’s a sustained rebound. If there’s not, it could get very messy very, very quickly.
His skill is not in policy-making or in vision-dreaming, but rather in a kind of stolid mediation or arbitration.
We can already see that the Starmer years will be reasonably dull, and the far left will be disappointed, but the country will be fairer and more content.
He and Labour need to make sure he is surrounded by a top-notch team, but I find the current Labour front bench the most impressive they’ve had since the Blair years.
I think his campaign will be dull, vacuous and worthy, but he would have the skills to manage a coalition well. Something that Corbyn never could have done when he was way short of a majority in 2017. That gives Starmer quite the edge.
On topic, I cannot see the Tories dumping Truss before a GE. For better or worse they are stuck with her. No comeback for Johnson, indeed likely to ignominiously lose his own seat at that GE.
On topic of your on topic, all of a sudden I am not so sure - the herd have got a taste for moving, if Truss was hollowed out by awful polls, elections, scandals - for example as a betting site how many weeks do we think Fulbrook rides this situation before resigning - one more scandal on top and the herd will move, only this time no phase 2 members element. The bookies would make Wallace favourite once Truss is ousted, I agree with HY, if Truss goes Wallace with lead the Conservatives into the election - except for one doubt, he’s not that many weeks ago ruled himself out, why does that change?
I would have it 50/50 Wallace or Truss leading Tories into next election. Just 2 weeks in and she would already lose a vonc. Six months of awful polling and she’s out.
1. It is far too early to say Truss is a failure. 2. Boris is not coming back.
“ It is far too early to say Truss is a failure. ‘
Too early to know the final score, but like a football team four down at half time and playing confused disjointed stuff, you can reasonably accurately predict how it ends up.
Six months of dire polling, slipping into 20s, then to mid 20s, and Truss is voncked. Gone. Yeah. I think we can reasonably predict that already.
Your second point. Fact is, If Boris had blagged himself into the contest like Corbyn had done when voncked, Boris would still be there is the truth of both the MPs picking top 2 and the membership vote that just happened. Instead of resigning he should have cut a deal as vonc winner to be allowed in contest. As Mike and the evidence in the header should educate you, Boris hasn’t gone away you know. Given a straight choice between Boris economics and Trump economics, the Tory Party would chose the former today let alone after six months of chaos and horrid polls.
She has already chosen the arena she wants to fight in, 'growth', and unceremoniously hauled Starmer into it. I see she has also managed to get him to swallow most of Kwasi's mini-budget. This is within a week of politics proper. Let's delay the post mortem shall we?
Starmer and Labour have been banging on about growth as the financial answer, as indeed have the last few Tory governments. It is the magic money tree that everyone wants to harvest but no one can find.
No budget is instantly met with a policy to reverse it, not least because there needs to be time to understand its effects, and no one writes a budget 2 years into the future.
So what you are saying is that (a) the tax policies of the last few years have failed to deliver growth; (b) therefore we should continue them
There are no good options for the Tories from here. The only question now is, can Labour win an overall majority? I think they can, even without a big recovery in Scotland.
Yeah, it's certainly feasible.
It's early days, but future historians may have to look at which party self-defeated the most: Labour under Corbyn, or the Conservatives under Truss and the latter days of Johnson (who was riding high in the polls until two years ago).
I'd argue the Conservatives have it worst, as they're doing this sh*t whilst they are in power. Labour at least had their lunacy in opposition.
Tumbling gas prices on track to slash £60bn cost of energy bailout Successful efforts to fill gas storage could halve prices by early next year
Britain's energy bills freeze could prove much less costly than feared by early next year, as City forecasters predict that gas prices will plunge this winter following a successful scramble across Europe to fill reserves.
A halving in gas prices in the coming months would push average household bills below the £2,500 limit set by the Government’s Energy Price Guarantee, slashing the cost of the intervention, according to estimates by Deutsche Bank. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/09/25/tumbling-gas-prices-track-slash-60bn- cost-energy-bailout/ (£££)
If only this site has someone who has been pointing at the gas futures price and querying the alleged costs.
The market reaction this week was always going to be much more important than the immediate reaction on Friday because the weekend has been a time to look in more detail at the government’s plans and strategy. Whatever our politics, we all have to hope there’s a sustained rebound. If there’s not, it could get very messy very, very quickly.
I can’t see any sign of a rebound. In fact, I expect the pound to go still lower. $0.90 wouldn’t shock me at some point this winter.
Bottom line is, we are importing most of our energy while running an energy intensive economy at a time when energy costs even if they’re going down are at enormous levels. At the same time we’ve disrupted all our traditional trading links. Our balance of payments is a fiasco.
It isn’t just currency speculators. We’re having significant capital outflows. And at the same time, the government has just exploded all rational fiscal policy in favour of some ideologically driven lunacy where even their own claims don’t stand up to a minute’s scrutiny.
Who would put money in the pound under those circumstances? Nobody sensible.
At least Russia has large reserves of gas, even if it is led by a small-cocked Nazi failure.
Coming to this a bit late, but re the BBC and the funeral.
This was a state funeral paid for by the state ie by us. Ditto the accession councils and all the rest of it. The BBC is funded by those who pay the license fee. This was not a private matter and the BBC was not hired by the RF like some wedding photographer. So the entire film of the occasion is a historic archive not the private property of the monarchy.
I very much hope the BBC (and, if necessary, the government) tell the monarchy to get stuffed if they try to limit access or use. This sort of arrogance is what will do for the monarchy.
Yes and the BBC filmed the funeral and accession council and lying in state live and in full.
However the archive is an entirely different matter, as it was also a funeral of a member of the royal family they get a say on how much of it broadcasters can store and use
Nonsense. If I filmed part of the funeral, that film belongs to me and the RF has no right to determine what I store and how I use it. No different for the BBC.
The RF cannot have their cake and eat it. This was a public historic and state event. The private family part of it was not filmed for the public. The RF have no right to determine what happens to films made of them in the public domain.
HYUFD is convinced, for some reason, that there’s s written contract. Which seems a bit daft to me. The RF will be doing what they always do, which is a mixture of trading on the habitual over-deference of the major broadcasters, and threatening to withhold future access. They should be politely but firmly resisted.
It would be extraordinary if there were not a detailed written contract between someone and someone dealing with basic access, installation of cameras etc (who put the camera in the roof? Who was responsible if damage occurred during the operation? Etc). The Abbey is a royal peculiar meaning under direct control of the Crown not the diocese, so the crown was presumably a party to that contract and can really stipulate what it likes and say if you don't like it, no access.
In the incredibly unlikely event there is no written contract there would almost certainly still be an oral one.
Macron's party came from nowhere and is very much a "president's party", whereas Meloni, although she fits into the mould of female, non-elite background, far right wing, racist demagogue (cf. Pauline Hanson), is in effect the leader of an established party that goes back to Benito Mussolini and has had a few changes of policy and name through the decades. The flaming tricolour logo is MSI all the way, right down to the red twiddle at the top.
I'm told the way she uses the term "gender" is very "Opus".
How is she planning to do that? My understanding of the low fertility rate there is that it is due to female education, and limited economic opportunities for the young.
As well as giving more financial support to mothers with children with paid state maternity leave, lower taxes on married couples with children and free kindergartens open for longer, Meloni is a supporter of keeping abortion restricted beyond 90 days and takes a traditional view on the family and sexuality
So greatly increased social security spend on mothers and children? Doesn't seem to match the "far right" tag
Fascists love going on about the need for high fertility in the favoured ethnic group, and they support state spending to encourage it.
* Battle for Births (Fascist Italy). * "A nation without a children is a nation without a future". (Ustashist Croatia). * The famous "14 words" so beloved of white supremacists in the US and elsewhere. * Etc. etc.
Fascists are collectivists, not individualists or libertarians.
Women's education is another matter.
And when that fails they kidnap large numbers of kids from a neighbouring country?
Must be two schools of thought amongst Tory MPs Those who actively want this nonsense Those who assumed Truss would be a touch looser fiscally than Sunak but might have half an eye on keeping Britain solvent.
Most likely thing is Truss sets out a plan to keep Britain solvent in the next few days and submits to the OBR, and others, for scrutiny.
But, she's also very obstinate and probably thinks the markets are wrong so I wouldn't bet on that.
Having created a crisis she will now use it to justify spending cuts, to balance the books. Since the financial markets concern is with the deficit, rather than overall policy, of the spending cuts plan is remotely credible it would calm the markets.
It would also calm Tory backbenchers. They might, in extremis, be prepared to rebel to prevent British bankruptcy, but few of them went into politics to defend high levels of public spending.
I think this is possibly all a deliberate political ploy, on the basis that they correctly judged it would be easier to sell spending cuts as a solution to a government debt crisis, than as a way to enable tax cuts.
Coming to this a bit late, but re the BBC and the funeral.
This was a state funeral paid for by the state ie by us. Ditto the accession councils and all the rest of it. The BBC is funded by those who pay the license fee. This was not a private matter and the BBC was not hired by the RF like some wedding photographer. So the entire film of the occasion is a historic archive not the private property of the monarchy.
I very much hope the BBC (and, if necessary, the government) tell the monarchy to get stuffed if they try to limit access or use. This sort of arrogance is what will do for the monarchy.
Yes and the BBC filmed the funeral and accession council and lying in state live and in full.
However the archive is an entirely different matter, as it was also a funeral of a member of the royal family they get a say on how much of it broadcasters can store and use
Nonsense. If I filmed part of the funeral, that film belongs to me and the RF has no right to determine what I store and how I use it. No different for the BBC.
The RF cannot have their cake and eat it. This was a public historic and state event. The private family part of it was not filmed for the public. The RF have no right to determine what happens to films made of them in the public domain.
HYUFD is convinced, for some reason, that there’s s written contract. Which seems a bit daft to me. The RF will be doing what they always do, which is a mixture of trading on the habitual over-deference of the major broadcasters, and threatening to withhold future access. They should be politely but firmly resisted.
It would be extraordinary if there were not a detailed written contract between someone and someone dealing with basic access, installation of cameras etc (who put the camera in the roof? Who was responsible if damage occurred during the operation? Etc). The Abbey is a royal peculiar meaning under direct control of the Crown not the diocese, so the crown was presumably a party to that contract and can really stipulate what it likes and say if you don't like it, no access.
In the incredibly unlikely event there is no written contract there would almost certainly still be an oral one.
Almost all historic and/or semi-public buildings have licence arrangements for filming in then anyway. Partly for those reasons, but also to protect themselves. They wouldn’t want to find - for example - that somebody had used footage they had taken of the altar as the background for a porn film or Nazi propaganda.
One of those conditions in my experience which isn’t extensive is some approval of the end product.
The market reaction this week was always going to be much more important than the immediate reaction on Friday because the weekend has been a time to look in more detail at the government’s plans and strategy. Whatever our politics, we all have to hope there’s a sustained rebound. If there’s not, it could get very messy very, very quickly.
Surely the super-rich need a further tax cut to keep the UK competitive? Any salary paid in Sterling just depreciated 5% since Friday.
This current shit show is brought to you by the people who brought you Brexit. Whose siren songs lured you into voting yourselves and your families poorer. Cynics who sing patriotism whilst shovelling more money into their offshore accounts. The real metropolitan elite.
This is what the Brexiters want, this is a desirable part of the process. Our current woes will be used to entrench more inequality, a smaller, shabbier, privatised to fuck public realm. Shitter services, an ever poorer NHS. The end of the NHS, if they can. Slashing the rules and regulations - that dreadful, stifling red tape - that, in thousands of ways, large and small, make our lives better, cleaner, more pleasant and equitable. But which cost these rich men money, so they must be done away with. Only profit matters.
The supremely rich men are happy that this is happening. They’ll be making money from it somehow, no doubt. They’re happy to watch us little people struggle and worry. It doesn’t bother them, it won’t hurt them. They are like scientists observing an experiment. They only care about themselves, not the UK or the people in it.
Brexit has hollowed out the Tory Party and left you with a rump of lunatics in charge who will cheer on this shitshow. In decades to come we’ll look back at the six years that have brought us to this point - the churn of governments, PMs, ministers, the stupid decisions leading to more stupid decisions, the choice to leave the free market, Johnson’s futile (and now shamelessly abandoned) attempts to somehow make the whole flawed enterprise actually deliver on some of its empty promises, and they will think: What the actual fuck was the UK doing?
Way back in the mid-1990s, just before 1997 landslide, I saw Blair speak at a Fabian conference and i well remember the buzz as he walked in surrounded by what Mason describes here as "earpiece" people. And a dozen TV cameras. There was a certain light, perhaps from some of the cameras, and an intensity of those surrounding him, that made it seem a profound moment.
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 8m 4/ Starmer - confident, surrounded by "earpiece people" - more presidential than prime ministerial. This works for him and unless Truss can generate a similar buzz at her own zombie conference, will start to soften the media towards Labour ...
Hard left wing journo slags off the Tories. Not news.
The market reaction this week was always going to be much more important than the immediate reaction on Friday because the weekend has been a time to look in more detail at the government’s plans and strategy. Whatever our politics, we all have to hope there’s a sustained rebound. If there’s not, it could get very messy very, very quickly.
I can’t see any sign of a rebound. In fact, I expect the pound to go still lower. $0.90 wouldn’t shock me at some point this winter.
Bottom line is, we are importing most of our energy while running an energy intensive economy at a time when energy costs even if they’re going down are at enormous levels. At the same time we’ve disrupted all our traditional trading links. Our balance of payments is a fiasco.
It isn’t just currency speculators. We’re having significant capital outflows. And at the same time, the government has just exploded all rational fiscal policy in favour of some ideologically driven lunacy where even their own claims don’t stand up to a minute’s scrutiny.
Who would put money in the pound under those circumstances? Nobody sensible.
At least Russia has large reserves of gas, even if it is led by a small-cocked Nazi failure.
Yep, it’s not looking good. The markets can see a government that has no acquaintance with the real world and are behaving accordingly. Presumably, the government and its fans will accuse them of being lefty Remoaners who hate Britain and just don’t get it.
The government wanted to devalue the pound. What they didn’t want was to shatter the illusion that the government has some control over the economy. To appear to lose control, as they have just done, is disastrous normally. The question I have is whether such a loss of control is disastrous politically in our current era, where some politicians seem to be able get away with anything.
There are no good options for the Tories from here. The only question now is, can Labour win an overall majority? I think they can, even without a big recovery in Scotland.
Yeah, it's certainly feasible.
It's early days, but future historians may have to look at which party self-defeated the most: Labour under Corbyn, or the Conservatives under Truss and the latter days of Johnson (who was riding high in the polls until two years ago).
I'd argue the Conservatives have it worst, as they're doing this sh*t whilst they are in power. Labour at least had their lunacy in opposition.
Just imagine the coverage if the pound and gilts had performed as they have since Friday morning after a Labour budget in which billions more had been borrowed to fund better public services and infrastructure.
From the Department of Probably Too Clever By Half, but does the Leader of the Conservative Party automatically become their Leader in the Commons and PM designate?
"The thing is that we respect that the party in the country wants you as their leader, but as MPs we'd prefer someone else here..."
The sinking currency is making the govt energy plan more expensive by the minute
And they’re going to have to pay through the nose to borrow the money to pay for it.
Lets hope the gas price futures crash in the coming weeks.
As I never tire of pointing out, we could have borrowed to fund tidal power lagoons a decade ago, at a cost which is now a tenth that of today's. That infrastructure would have lasted fifty years at a minimum. The economics quite possibly don't stack up now. That's a huge failure of government.
Coming to this a bit late, but re the BBC and the funeral.
This was a state funeral paid for by the state ie by us. Ditto the accession councils and all the rest of it. The BBC is funded by those who pay the license fee. This was not a private matter and the BBC was not hired by the RF like some wedding photographer. So the entire film of the occasion is a historic archive not the private property of the monarchy.
I very much hope the BBC (and, if necessary, the government) tell the monarchy to get stuffed if they try to limit access or use. This sort of arrogance is what will do for the monarchy.
Yes and the BBC filmed the funeral and accession council and lying in state live and in full.
However the archive is an entirely different matter, as it was also a funeral of a member of the royal family they get a say on how much of it broadcasters can store and use
Nonsense. If I filmed part of the funeral, that film belongs to me and the RF has no right to determine what I store and how I use it. No different for the BBC.
The RF cannot have their cake and eat it. This was a public historic and state event. The private family part of it was not filmed for the public. The RF have no right to determine what happens to films made of them in the public domain.
I suspect they want to have an “official” DVD made in partnership with the BBC… all proceeds to restoring the palaces (so effectively tax payers). But they can’t say that as it seems so grubby
The RF have already been moving to censor what other productions are made, and ban some platforms outright. Which is, however, a different and not necessarily mutually exclusive matter. And does not require the hour restriction. Which your commercial reason would.
From the Department of Probably Too Clever By Half, but does the Leader of the Conservative Party automatically become their Leader in the Commons and PM designate?
"The thing is that we respect that the party in the country wants you as their leader, but as MPs we'd prefer someone else here..."
Last time the PM wasn’t also a party leader was September 1940. Since then it’s always been the leader of the largest party.
So yes, in practice.
Edit - in theory, of course, you’re right in that it’s the person who controls the whips, not the person who is official party leader. However, the PM in your scenario would (a) have no access to party funds, so could only govern, not campaign and (b) would probably be immediately deselected.
There are no good options for the Tories from here. The only question now is, can Labour win an overall majority? I think they can, even without a big recovery in Scotland.
Yeah, it's certainly feasible.
It's early days, but future historians may have to look at which party self-defeated the most: Labour under Corbyn, or the Conservatives under Truss and the latter days of Johnson (who was riding high in the polls until two years ago).
I'd argue the Conservatives have it worst, as they're doing this sh*t whilst they are in power. Labour at least had their lunacy in opposition.
Just imagine the coverage if the pound and gilts had performed as they have since Friday morning after a Labour budget in which billions more had been borrowed to fund better public services and infrastructure.
Yes, but it's Tories so OK, especially if Labour have to clean up the mess. We see this attitude here with some.
The sinking currency is making the govt energy plan more expensive by the minute
And they’re going to have to pay through the nose to borrow the money to pay for it.
Lets hope the gas price futures crash in the coming weeks.
As I never tire of pointing out, we could have borrowed to fund tidal power lagoons a decade ago, at a cost which is now a tenth that of today's. That infrastructure would have lasted fifty years at a minimum. The economics quite possibly don't stack up now. That's a huge failure of government.
Truss was Chief Sec at the Treasury when the tidal lagoons project was scrapped.
Coming to this a bit late, but re the BBC and the funeral.
This was a state funeral paid for by the state ie by us. Ditto the accession councils and all the rest of it. The BBC is funded by those who pay the license fee. This was not a private matter and the BBC was not hired by the RF like some wedding photographer. So the entire film of the occasion is a historic archive not the private property of the monarchy.
I very much hope the BBC (and, if necessary, the government) tell the monarchy to get stuffed if they try to limit access or use. This sort of arrogance is what will do for the monarchy.
Yes and the BBC filmed the funeral and accession council and lying in state live and in full.
However the archive is an entirely different matter, as it was also a funeral of a member of the royal family they get a say on how much of it broadcasters can store and use
Nonsense. If I filmed part of the funeral, that film belongs to me and the RF has no right to determine what I store and how I use it. No different for the BBC.
The RF cannot have their cake and eat it. This was a public historic and state event. The private family part of it was not filmed for the public. The RF have no right to determine what happens to films made of them in the public domain.
HYUFD is convinced, for some reason, that there’s s written contract. Which seems a bit daft to me. The RF will be doing what they always do, which is a mixture of trading on the habitual over-deference of the major broadcasters, and threatening to withhold future access. They should be politely but firmly resisted.
I think it’s more likely than not that there is a written document of some sort - where they can put cameras etc
Comments
One of the astonishing things about this fiasco is Truss’s utterly tenuous victory. Barely any Tory MPs supported her to begin with, and she won the membership with the narrowest margin since fuck knows when.
Just lacking the virgins.
https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/status/1574058496324157440
What is the Russian Orthodox Church making of Putin's mobilisation?
Patriarch Kirill said in his sermon today that soldiers dying in Ukraine would have all their sins washed away
Liz Truss did show during the leadership campaign some willingness to ditch proposals that seemed unpopular and/or impracticable. Let us hope this continues. It is not to her credit that they got as far as needing to be dropped.
It’s a corpse which could win the next election, and controls at least part of the Supreme Court.
Let that sink in.
£1=$1.0498
Rishi Sunak 137
Liz Truss 113
(Penny Mordaunt 105; eliminated)
If LizT is replaced before the next general election, it is unlikely the men in grey suits will want to repeat last summer's members' vote (and six weeks of blue on blue attacks). Either there will be a coronation of an unopposed candidate or the selectorate will be MPs only.
Conscripts do not undergo any military training before being sent to the war against Ukraine, Ukraine's General Staff said.
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1574170287406567428
The only difference between her and Boris seems to be that he wants to rake in money and she wants to rake in adoration. Neither of them are any use to the rest of us.
“Truss Pledges to Build World Beating Economy”
The right-wing coalition is on 44.4% with about 80% counted.
https://elezioni.interno.gov.it/camera/scrutini/20220925/scrutiniCI
Successful efforts to fill gas storage could halve prices by early next year
Britain's energy bills freeze could prove much less costly than feared by early next year, as City forecasters predict that gas prices will plunge this winter following a successful scramble across Europe to fill reserves.
A halving in gas prices in the coming months would push average household bills below the £2,500 limit set by the Government’s Energy Price Guarantee, slashing the cost of the intervention, according to estimates by Deutsche Bank.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/09/25/tumbling-gas-prices-track-slash-60bn-cost-energy-bailout/ (£££)
UK 10 year gilt 5.8% - up from 3.8% on Friday night.
The Tories have fucked our country.
I can’t find any live quotes for this. Anyone have a Bloomberg terminal?
JHC.
(although (with hindsight?) it is clear that the BoE was behind the curve and should have been more aggressive a long time ago...)
A small minority of MPs went for her, and she's appointed nothing but her friends to Government.
I assume Bailey, and I'm no fan, guessed the government might follow a sane fiscal plan ?
If we ignore the collateral damage.
Those who actively want this nonsense
Those who assumed Truss would be a touch looser fiscally than Sunak but might have half an eye on keeping Britain solvent.
One little thing that I (inexpert that I am) always thought would come back to bite was the Osborne “trick” of banking the interest that BoE earned on Govt bonds (under QE) back to the Treasury. Now BoE is seeking to unwind the size of its balance sheet isn’t that now an extra cost that the Govt is facing? (or was that always a backward looking thing not accounted for in future forecasts - the banking of the interest?).
Would probably have been better off overall losing the 2 grand tbh
But, she's also very obstinate and probably thinks the markets are wrong so I wouldn't bet on that.
It’s a shame that so many conclusions were drawn from Johnson’s ouster than the right one. That, politically, the problem was fundamentally Johnson himself, and by extension his style of Govt. Not actually his policies. Nothing in Johnson’s collapse in the polls and subsequent removal necessitated a complete 180 in Govt political philosophy and policy. The quote above about Truss abandoning a platform that brought a majority of 80 to pursue the seven libertarian voters in the country is telling.
M5S to win all 7 Greater Naples seats (the electoral commission has confirmed 4 with all boxes counted. but most other seats are at 99% + of boxes counted)
Emilia: Right 7 seats. Left 3 seats, Carpi still tctc going into last boxes (left lead)
Tuscany: Right 7 seats. Left 2 seats
Lets hope the gas price futures crash in the coming weeks.
One question is whether any other countries/central banks have interests in helping out the £ if BoE is unable. (Global financial stability? Impact on the city?). Or can they afford to just let the £ swing?
The rules are set by the 1922 committee. My point was that they might have elected her leader now. They have no legal/contractual right to prevent her removal.
It's taken politicians less than a week (excluding national mourning) to create a financial crisis after he was fired.
Will be fascinating to see European markets today and Tory MP reaction. I do not think there will be much loyalty for Truss
I didn't say they had a right to prevent her removal.
Just sounds bizarre for a conservative government
Putin must die.
https://www.nationalgrideso.com/electricity-explained/how-electricity-priced
According to various sources Odey has pocketed a tidy 145 million in the last couple of days,..
This is just more or less naked theft.
While pretending to give us money.
Pretty quick work.
Truss from 41 to 34 on Ladbrokes to leave this year. Narrow timing.
It's early days, but future historians may have to look at which party self-defeated the most: Labour under Corbyn, or the Conservatives under Truss and the latter days of Johnson (who was riding high in the polls until two years ago).
I'd argue the Conservatives have it worst, as they're doing this sh*t whilst they are in power. Labour at least had their lunacy in opposition.
Bottom line is, we are importing most of our energy while running an energy intensive economy at a time when energy costs even if they’re going down are at enormous levels. At the same time we’ve disrupted all our traditional trading links. Our balance of payments is a fiasco.
It isn’t just currency speculators. We’re having significant capital outflows. And at the same time, the government has just exploded all rational fiscal policy in favour of some ideologically driven lunacy where even their own claims don’t stand up to a minute’s scrutiny.
Who would put money in the pound under those circumstances? Nobody sensible.
At least Russia has large reserves of gas, even if it is led by a small-cocked Nazi failure.
In the incredibly unlikely event there is no written contract there would almost certainly still be an oral one.
It would also calm Tory backbenchers. They might, in extremis, be prepared to rebel to prevent British bankruptcy, but few of them went into politics to defend high levels of public spending.
I think this is possibly all a deliberate political ploy, on the basis that they correctly judged it would be easier to sell spending cuts as a solution to a government debt crisis, than as a way to enable tax cuts.
One of those conditions in my experience which isn’t extensive is some approval of the end product.
Will no one think of the bankers?
This current shit show is brought to you by the people who brought you Brexit. Whose siren songs lured you into voting yourselves and your families poorer. Cynics who sing patriotism whilst shovelling more money into their offshore accounts. The real metropolitan elite.
This is what the Brexiters want, this is a desirable part of the process. Our current woes will be used to entrench more inequality, a smaller, shabbier, privatised to fuck public realm. Shitter services, an ever poorer NHS. The end of the NHS, if they can. Slashing the rules and regulations - that dreadful, stifling red tape - that, in thousands of ways, large and small, make our lives better, cleaner, more pleasant and equitable. But which cost these rich men money, so they must be done away with. Only profit matters.
The supremely rich men are happy that this is happening. They’ll be making money from it somehow, no doubt. They’re happy to watch us little people struggle and worry. It doesn’t bother them, it won’t hurt them. They are like scientists observing an experiment. They only care about themselves, not the UK or the people in it.
Brexit has hollowed out the Tory Party and left you with a rump of lunatics in charge who will cheer on this shitshow. In decades to come we’ll look back at the six years that have brought us to this point - the churn of governments, PMs, ministers, the stupid decisions leading to more stupid decisions, the choice to leave the free market, Johnson’s futile (and now shamelessly abandoned) attempts to somehow make the whole flawed enterprise actually deliver on some of its empty promises, and they will think: What the actual fuck was the UK doing?
"The thing is that we respect that the party in the country wants you as their leader, but as MPs we'd prefer someone else here..."
That infrastructure would have lasted fifty years at a minimum. The economics quite possibly don't stack up
now.
That's a huge failure of government.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/22/royal-family-veto-footage-coverage-queen-elizabeth-ii-funeral
So yes, in practice.
Edit - in theory, of course, you’re right in that it’s the person who controls the whips, not the person who is official party leader. However, the PM in your scenario would (a) have no access to party funds, so could only govern, not campaign and (b) would probably be immediately deselected.