NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
Please don’t think this is insensitive - it’s not meant this way. Why is she at hospital if she’s not suffering an acute life threatening emergency? Would she not be more comfortable having tea and biscuits at home? Why was the ambulance called?
UTI which won't clear, nurse was concerned about infection spreading and leading to sepsis, which would have a high chance of being fatal.
Not every medical condition is either as trivial as a common cold or as serious as a cardiac arrest. Doesn't mean that some of those in between don't also require hospitalization. And the patient in this case is practically housebound and somewhat confused, it's not as if she could get to an acute hospital under her own steam and then wait however many hours or days on a chair in A&E to be seen and assessed.
The Government would doubtless like to wish away inconvenient sick old people like this, but as Therese Coffey will discover this Winter it ain't that simple.
Cheers. I wasn’t trying to be insensitive, as I hope I expressed. Older folks are very prone to utis and confusion. Hopefully she gets admitted soon. Clearly there we have demonstrated that running the NHS ‘efficiently’, where ‘efficiently’ means minimising empty beds leads to chaos if you get a surge in need. Covid is exacerbating the winter surges that we’ve seen for years. Time to look afresh at a system that copes with variable demand.
Perhaps increasing capacity would help? Like staffing admissions better so the ambulance crews can hand off their patients and get back out on the road. We know exactly why ambulances are backed up, it is not a mystery
I've always said that Gove is the smartest of them. He's proved it again this morning. I think he is the one that Labour should fear. He's clever, gets things done and is politically savvy. He knows how to play the game.
Keir Starmer has adopted Gove’s “muscular unionism” lock, stock and barrel. We’ll soon find out how “smart” and “clever” that was. Ho ho.
We will. If a decent chunk of Scottish Tory voters switch to Labour, things could get interesting.
My guesstimate (see discussion with Robert Smithson early yesterday morning) is that approximately 8pp have shifted directly from SCon to SLab. (The SNP, SLD and Grn VI appear to be largely unchanged.)
If I am correct, we’d be looking at a Scottish seat distribution (new boundaries) of approximately:
If Starmer only manages 2 gains in Scotland then he must dig deep, deep into solid Con territory in southern England. Doable, but extraordinarily difficult.
Enough mortgage defaults, enough redundancies, large enough drops in house prices, enough delayed and cancelled operations, and enough people dying for lack of prompt emergency care, and it'll happen - though FWIW it's not as if Labour has to infiltrate the stockbroker belt (though the Lib Dems just might.) Enough Tory losses in the Midlands and East Anglia, on top of a more general collapse in the North and Wales, and Labour will be home and hosed.
Before the Thatcher revolution started in 1979, this particular leafy corner of the world used to return Labour MPs. There's still a plaque on one of the local buildings commemorating when Shirley Williams opened it.
Sometimes there are paradigm shifts when everything in the political landscape changes dramatically. If it can happen in Scotland it can happen here.
"The first job of an MP is to act in the interest of their constituents & in the national interest. We cannot clap for carers one month & cut tax for millionaires months later."
Why is the challenger so long in Brazil? Consistent, significant, poll leads yet 1.44 this morning?
Perhaps because of concerns Bolsonaro will refuse to accept the results and they’re not sure where that leads to especially if some of the armed services get involved .
More concerns that the actual vote won't be counted and Bolsonaro will just proclaim he got 99.9999%
If the Budget is voted down, surely that is once again a confidence issue and it's therefore time for a general election
Surely there is the opportunity to see if someone else can form a government? I'd rather options were exhausted than having to go straight to a general election.
This is the problem with allowing party selectorates to choose the Prime minister. At least Brown and May had coronations. Johnson had a general election within months.
I've always said that Gove is the smartest of them. He's proved it again this morning. I think he is the one that Labour should fear. He's clever, gets things done and is politically savvy. He knows how to play the game.
Threatening to withdraw the whip is no threat if 40+ MPs declare like Gove that they will rebel in a budget vote.
Truss is about to discover what all those questions about democratic legitimacy mean.
That's what people were saying about Boris when they mocked him for "losing" the majority, which only existed by including the DUP, in the Commons. A few months later he won an 80 seat majority.
Not likely to happen again by any means, but voting against the whip on matters of Confidence and Supply has always meant losing the whip.
The difference then was the rebels were blocking the government's own manifesto commitment to deliver Brexit by constantly voting against it. This time there was no manifesto commitment to cut the additional rate or for significant spending cuts. The Tories will be finished for longer than a generation if Truss manages to throw over 40 MPs out of the party on the basis of them opposing tax cuts for very high earners funded by benefit cuts for working age people.
Realistically the party will remove her before that happens. She's been a disaster for both party and country.
"The first job of an MP is to act in the interest of their constituents & in the national interest. We cannot clap for carers one month & cut tax for millionaires months later."
Framing the abolition of an income tax band that was intended to be a temporary measure when it was introduced as a "cut tax for millionaires" shows how much the Tory party has ceased to be a party of aspiration.
If a Tory leader was at the top now we'd be saying how long the other parties had left.
We might genuinely see a Tory Party split.
I think a formal split is one of the less likely outcomes. However, if the Tory leadership issues a firm ultimatum about withdrawal of the whip yet a large number of rebels refuses to endorse the Kamikwazi budget, it's not out of the question. It'd only take a group of about 35 Tory MPs who are sufficiently horrified by the current leadership, and are willing to jump because they are retiring, feel they have no chance of holding their seats, or are simply acting on principle (please, no laughing at the back,) to jump ship and back Starmer in a confidence vote to finish the Government off. We can but hope.
I've always said that Gove is the smartest of them. He's proved it again this morning. I think he is the one that Labour should fear. He's clever, gets things done and is politically savvy. He knows how to play the game.
Threatening to withdraw the whip is no threat if 40+ MPs declare like Gove that they will rebel in a budget vote.
Truss is about to discover what all those questions about democratic legitimacy mean.
That's what people were saying about Boris when they mocked him for "losing" the majority, which only existed by including the DUP, in the Commons. A few months later he won an 80 seat majority.
Not likely to happen again by any means, but voting against the whip on matters of Confidence and Supply has always meant losing the whip.
The difference then was the rebels were blocking the government's own manifesto commitment to deliver Brexit by constantly voting against it. This time there was no manifesto commitment to cut the additional rate or for significant spending cuts. The Tories will be finished for longer than a generation if Truss manages to throw over 40 MPs out of the party on the basis of them opposing tax cuts for very high earners funded by benefit cuts for working age people.
Realistically the party will remove her before that happens. She's been a disaster for both party and country.
Hiya Max, hope you are getting some sleep in. I'm sadly under the weather at present and not sleeping too well myself.
This was all predicted, the Tory Party needs to go away now.
I've always said that Gove is the smartest of them. He's proved it again this morning. I think he is the one that Labour should fear. He's clever, gets things done and is politically savvy. He knows how to play the game.
Keir Starmer has adopted Gove’s “muscular unionism” lock, stock and barrel. We’ll soon find out how “smart” and “clever” that was. Ho ho.
We will. If a decent chunk of Scottish Tory voters switch to Labour, things could get interesting.
There is no doubt Starmer as PM is not good news for the SNP
Huh? Starmer’s net approval north of the border in today’s Opinium is +/-0. That suits the SNP just fine.
I remember the dog days of the Major government and the meteoric rise of Tony Blair. I’ll never forget knocking doors in Inverness and nearly every single person, irrespective of whether a LD, Con, Lab or SNP voter, telling me that Tony was the next messiah. Or sentiments to that effect. Blair’s net approval in Scotland in 95 must have been about +70. Starmer is just another dud as far as Scots are concerned.
In terms of SNP governing a devolved Scotland - absolutely. But that's not the stated aim here is it?
NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
This was my hospital last week. Each ambulance was unable to unload and had a patient in the back.
I counted 24.
That’s shit. It is patchy though. RUH in Bath no issues when I was there.
If you run a queuing system at 95% of max capacity, small variances in load can lead to wildly different queuing times. Unless you have a lot of slack in the system you end up randomly getting stuck in these states with very long queues that remain in place for an extremely long time.
By way of example, it was a news story in Japan when they announced that they were going to lift the 50% bed occupancy ceiling for declaring an emergancy during the Covid epidemic. They must look at us & think we’re insane.
If the Budget is voted down, surely that is once again a confidence issue and it's therefore time for a general election
It's an interesting point. One of the consequences of the Fixed Term Parliament Act was that it effectively ended the traditional position of Queen's(/King's) Speech and budget being confidence issues which automatically brought down the Government. Now that the FTPA has been repealed, have we now just returned to the pre-2010 position?
Ostensibly yes, is my understanding. I keep meaning to read the bill though to see if there are any caveats that have been missed, though.
At a tangent, and out of interest, what is the actual Constitutional reason why failing to pass the budget collapses the Government? I can think of two possible reasons (quite probably linked).
1) the other day somebody mentioned that by convention a (proper) budget comes into force automatically, and the Finance Act is passed to legitimise it in statute. So it makes sense that failure to pass the Finance Act creates a constitutional issue of the level that forces the bringing down of the (King's) Government. This explains why sometimes a Finance Act is actually officially passed after some measures have actually come into force on (usually) 5th April.
2) it's all linked to the reason why Parliament exists going back to (at least) the 13th century. Ie. the purpose of the convening of Parliament by the monarch was to raise funds (usually to fight wars). So officially the raising of taxation still falls under the (historical) Royal Prerogative but without the force of law the Govt (/King) lack the means of enforcement.
This is exactly why ambulances are backed up, schools are struggling, etc., though. People look at the comparable wages and conditions in supermarkets and the Public Sector can't recruit. It is the free market. Quite why their theory is that what it needs is a pay freeze remains something of a mystery.
Or more likely 45p will be pulled before it gets near the floor of the House.
The 45p rate isn't the point and I've never liked it. We had 40p rate for almost two decades before Gordon Brown cranked it up and I'm entirely open to arguments that it might help us attract international talent and be more competitive.
It's the overall ideological dogma and cavalier economic recklessness of the package, combined with obstinacy and awful communication and political skills, that get me.
NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
This was my hospital last week. Each ambulance was unable to unload and had a patient in the back.
I counted 24.
That’s shit. It is patchy though. RUH in Bath no issues when I was there.
Which makes me wonder about the state of the non hospital NHS around Leicester. The phenomenon of A&E becoming the last resort when the GPs and other facilities have become overloaded has been seen many times.
For those gloomy about the future of the NHS, I think there are many possibilities. One, for example, is the possible massive reduction in cost, size and operator skill for medical monitoring equipment.
A chap I know is working on a contract for the US army - to reduce the room full of stuff they wire a critical patient up to, to first a couple of backpacks and then… well there is is no limit to how small they will try and go. The idea is, initially, to have the system in all med evac helicopters. Then to medics in the field.
They’ve a long way to go - but the other thing is the potential cost reduction. The existing equipment costs a fortune. If they can get a system that is practical for mass production….
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
Please don’t think this is insensitive - it’s not meant this way. Why is she at hospital if she’s not suffering an acute life threatening emergency? Would she not be more comfortable having tea and biscuits at home? Why was the ambulance called?
UTI which won't clear, nurse was concerned about infection spreading and leading to sepsis, which would have a high chance of being fatal.
Not every medical condition is either as trivial as a common cold or as serious as a cardiac arrest. Doesn't mean that some of those in between don't also require hospitalization. And the patient in this case is practically housebound and somewhat confused, it's not as if she could get to an acute hospital under her own steam and then wait however many hours or days on a chair in A&E to be seen and assessed.
The Government would doubtless like to wish away inconvenient sick old people like this, but as Therese Coffey will discover this Winter it ain't that simple.
Cheers. I wasn’t trying to be insensitive, as I hope I expressed. Older folks are very prone to utis and confusion. Hopefully she gets admitted soon. Clearly there we have demonstrated that running the NHS ‘efficiently’, where ‘efficiently’ means minimising empty beds leads to chaos if you get a surge in need. Covid is exacerbating the winter surges that we’ve seen for years. Time to look afresh at a system that copes with variable demand.
Perhaps increasing capacity would help? Like staffing admissions better so the ambulance crews can hand off their patients and get back out on the road. We know exactly why ambulances are backed up, it is not a mystery
Agree. Just to add, also increasing social care capacity. As I understand it, far too many hospital beds are blocked by people who could be discharged but have nowhere to go, and/or nobody to look after them.
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
Nobody sane thinks they should be in Government any more. They need to go and go now.
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
Eco zealot, 21, who poured human FAECES on Captain Sir Tom memorial could face criminal charges
Oh I see, cancel culture is okay as long as it's something we don't like
You could argue there's a difference between being cancelled and being held to account for a misdemeanour of this nature. Cancelling would have involved stopping them making the protest in the first place.
Truss is speaking lower and lower. Same BS as when Thatcher decided to speak like a man. So even now she is cosplaying Thatcha.
She can’t be far off a mental breakdown. Surely the “retiring on health grounds” gambit is being considered in the upper echelons of The Establishment? It is the only reasonably graceful way out for her now.
A pregnancy?
Not if rumours of preferred behaviour are true, like the newly wed Greek bride.
There is a difference between voting against a measure, and not voting for it. Before placing wagers, check precisely what Gove said. Abstention and absence provide cover.
If a Tory leader was at the top now we'd be saying how long the other parties had left.
We might genuinely see a Tory Party split.
I think a formal split is one of the less likely outcomes. However, if the Tory leadership issues a firm ultimatum about withdrawal of the whip yet a large number of rebels refuses to endorse the Kamikwazi budget, it's not out of the question. It'd only take a group of about 35 Tory MPs who are sufficiently horrified by the current leadership, and are willing to jump because they are retiring, feel they have no chance of holding their seats, or are simply acting on principle (please, no laughing at the back,) to jump ship and back Starmer in a confidence vote to finish the Government off. We can but hope.
If a group of Tory MPs do get together to remove Truss as leader, will it be called the 2022 Committee?
I've always said that Gove is the smartest of them. He's proved it again this morning. I think he is the one that Labour should fear. He's clever, gets things done and is politically savvy. He knows how to play the game.
Threatening to withdraw the whip is no threat if 40+ MPs declare like Gove that they will rebel in a budget vote.
Truss is about to discover what all those questions about democratic legitimacy mean.
That's what people were saying about Boris when they mocked him for "losing" the majority, which only existed by including the DUP, in the Commons. A few months later he won an 80 seat majority.
Not likely to happen again by any means, but voting against the whip on matters of Confidence and Supply has always meant losing the whip.
The difference then was the rebels were blocking the government's own manifesto commitment to deliver Brexit by constantly voting against it. This time there was no manifesto commitment to cut the additional rate or for significant spending cuts. The Tories will be finished for longer than a generation if Truss manages to throw over 40 MPs out of the party on the basis of them opposing tax cuts for very high earners funded by benefit cuts for working age people.
Realistically the party will remove her before that happens. She's been a disaster for both party and country.
The other difference is that Boris was able to gamble on a General Election to break the stalemate in Parliament. He faced a weak and divisive LotO, and his gamble paid off. This was before my time here, but I remember telling people that BJ had a good chance in that election. The gamble paid off with an 80 seat majority.
Truss attempting to do the same would be very, very brave.
"The first job of an MP is to act in the interest of their constituents & in the national interest. We cannot clap for carers one month & cut tax for millionaires months later."
Framing the abolition of an income tax band that was intended to be a temporary measure when it was introduced as a "cut tax for millionaires" shows how much the Tory party has ceased to be a party of aspiration.
Balls. This Government is presenting itself as a party of aspiration for the very wealthy and a party of poverty and degradation for everyone else. That much is obvious. The token tax cuts for the general population - the cancellation of the NHS Tax and the forthcoming reduction in the basic rate - will be wiped out many times over by the cumulative effects of inflation, crap wage settlements and fiscal drag. Only the very well off will benefit overall, and the cuts for them are to be paid for directly by freezes in working age benefits and cuts to public services.
The Government's economic plan, in short, consists of asking the great mass of the people to bear with the process of being impoverished, frozen, starved and denied prompt medical treatment for a few years, whilst ministers seek to re-float the British economy on a great wave of VAT receipts from sales of Champagne, foie gras and mink coats. Only ministers and their most delusional or plain stupid backers think that this has any realistic prospect of success.
NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
Please don’t think this is insensitive - it’s not meant this way. Why is she at hospital if she’s not suffering an acute life threatening emergency? Would she not be more comfortable having tea and biscuits at home? Why was the ambulance called?
UTI which won't clear, nurse was concerned about infection spreading and leading to sepsis, which would have a high chance of being fatal.
Not every medical condition is either as trivial as a common cold or as serious as a cardiac arrest. Doesn't mean that some of those in between don't also require hospitalization. And the patient in this case is practically housebound and somewhat confused, it's not as if she could get to an acute hospital under her own steam and then wait however many hours or days on a chair in A&E to be seen and assessed.
The Government would doubtless like to wish away inconvenient sick old people like this, but as Therese Coffey will discover this Winter it ain't that simple.
Cheers. I wasn’t trying to be insensitive, as I hope I expressed. Older folks are very prone to utis and confusion. Hopefully she gets admitted soon. Clearly there we have demonstrated that running the NHS ‘efficiently’, where ‘efficiently’ means minimising empty beds leads to chaos if you get a surge in need. Covid is exacerbating the winter surges that we’ve seen for years. Time to look afresh at a system that copes with variable demand.
Perhaps increasing capacity would help? Like staffing admissions better so the ambulance crews can hand off their patients and get back out on the road. We know exactly why ambulances are backed up, it is not a mystery
I agree, but to do that is to overcome the orthodoxy that fills the NHS managerial ranks - efficiency. It is anathema to have empty beds for no reason.
NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
Please don’t think this is insensitive - it’s not meant this way. Why is she at hospital if she’s not suffering an acute life threatening emergency? Would she not be more comfortable having tea and biscuits at home? Why was the ambulance called?
UTI which won't clear, nurse was concerned about infection spreading and leading to sepsis, which would have a high chance of being fatal.
Not every medical condition is either as trivial as a common cold or as serious as a cardiac arrest. Doesn't mean that some of those in between don't also require hospitalization. And the patient in this case is practically housebound and somewhat confused, it's not as if she could get to an acute hospital under her own steam and then wait however many hours or days on a chair in A&E to be seen and assessed.
The Government would doubtless like to wish away inconvenient sick old people like this, but as Therese Coffey will discover this Winter it ain't that simple.
Cheers. I wasn’t trying to be insensitive, as I hope I expressed. Older folks are very prone to utis and confusion. Hopefully she gets admitted soon. Clearly there we have demonstrated that running the NHS ‘efficiently’, where ‘efficiently’ means minimising empty beds leads to chaos if you get a surge in need. Covid is exacerbating the winter surges that we’ve seen for years. Time to look afresh at a system that copes with variable demand.
Perhaps increasing capacity would help? Like staffing admissions better so the ambulance crews can hand off their patients and get back out on the road. We know exactly why ambulances are backed up, it is not a mystery
Agree. Just to add, also increasing social care capacity. As I understand it, far too many hospital beds are blocked by people who could be discharged but have nowhere to go, and/or nobody to look after them.
Yes. Putting social care inside local council budgets & emergency care inside the NHS has led to exactly this outcome. The government can crow all it likes about how it protected NHS funding, but local council budgets have been squeezed till the pips squeak.
You can argue whether that was right or wrong till the cows come home, but one of the consequences has been a collapse in social care provision, which is having exactly the kind of knock on effects on the rest of the system that you would expect & would have been obvious to anyone with half a brain.
"The first job of an MP is to act in the interest of their constituents & in the national interest. We cannot clap for carers one month & cut tax for millionaires months later."
Framing the abolition of an income tax band that was intended to be a temporary measure when it was introduced as a "cut tax for millionaires" shows how much the Tory party has ceased to be a party of aspiration.
Balls. This Government is presenting itself as a party of aspiration for the very wealthy and a party of poverty and degradation for everyone else. That much is obvious. The token tax cuts for the general population - the cancellation of the NHS Tax and the forthcoming reduction in the basic rate - will be wiped out many times over by the cumulative effects of inflation, crap wage settlements and fiscal drag. Only the very well off will benefit overall, and the cuts for them are to be paid for directly by freezes in working age benefits and cuts to public services.
The Government's economic plan, in short, consists of asking the great mass of the people to bear with the process of being impoverished, frozen, starved and denied prompt medical treatment for a few years, whilst ministers seek to re-float the British economy on a great wave of VAT receipts from sales of Champagne, foie gras and mink coats. Only ministers and their most delusional or plain stupid backers think that this has any realistic prospect of success.
The headlines are now that the Govt is looking at cancelling uprating rises in benefits in order to pay for the tax cuts. So they haven't even got a narrative of the higher rate tax cuts paying for themselves now.
I've always said that Gove is the smartest of them. He's proved it again this morning. I think he is the one that Labour should fear. He's clever, gets things done and is politically savvy. He knows how to play the game.
Threatening to withdraw the whip is no threat if 40+ MPs declare like Gove that they will rebel in a budget vote.
Truss is about to discover what all those questions about democratic legitimacy mean.
That's what people were saying about Boris when they mocked him for "losing" the majority, which only existed by including the DUP, in the Commons. A few months later he won an 80 seat majority.
Not likely to happen again by any means, but voting against the whip on matters of Confidence and Supply has always meant losing the whip.
The difference then was the rebels were blocking the government's own manifesto commitment to deliver Brexit by constantly voting against it. This time there was no manifesto commitment to cut the additional rate or for significant spending cuts. The Tories will be finished for longer than a generation if Truss manages to throw over 40 MPs out of the party on the basis of them opposing tax cuts for very high earners funded by benefit cuts for working age people.
Realistically the party will remove her before that happens. She's been a disaster for both party and country.
The £2bn change to the 45p tax rate I don't especially care about either way, I expect cutting it to be revenue positive but the tax rate doesn't affect me. But let's be honest, if we are only talking about a £2bn change then this is a ridiculous overreaction.
Putting NI back to the rate at the last election OTOH absolutely does match the manifesto which pledged not to increase the rate. It was the tax rise that broke the manifesto, not reversing that breach.
NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
Please don’t think this is insensitive - it’s not meant this way. Why is she at hospital if she’s not suffering an acute life threatening emergency? Would she not be more comfortable having tea and biscuits at home? Why was the ambulance called?
UTI which won't clear, nurse was concerned about infection spreading and leading to sepsis, which would have a high chance of being fatal.
Not every medical condition is either as trivial as a common cold or as serious as a cardiac arrest. Doesn't mean that some of those in between don't also require hospitalization. And the patient in this case is practically housebound and somewhat confused, it's not as if she could get to an acute hospital under her own steam and then wait however many hours or days on a chair in A&E to be seen and assessed.
The Government would doubtless like to wish away inconvenient sick old people like this, but as Therese Coffey will discover this Winter it ain't that simple.
Cheers. I wasn’t trying to be insensitive, as I hope I expressed. Older folks are very prone to utis and confusion. Hopefully she gets admitted soon. Clearly there we have demonstrated that running the NHS ‘efficiently’, where ‘efficiently’ means minimising empty beds leads to chaos if you get a surge in need. Covid is exacerbating the winter surges that we’ve seen for years. Time to look afresh at a system that copes with variable demand.
Perhaps increasing capacity would help? Like staffing admissions better so the ambulance crews can hand off their patients and get back out on the road. We know exactly why ambulances are backed up, it is not a mystery
I agree, but to do that is to overcome the orthodoxy that fills the NHS managerial ranks - efficiency. It is anathema to have empty beds for no reason.
If they are worried by defining efficiency, perhaps they should glance out of a window overlooking the Admissions area....
I can remember when Gove was often described by left-of-centre PBers as the most unsuitable person to lead the party. That was when there was a chance of him getting the position.
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Well, obviously, if Labour wins outright and doesn't need any meaningful co-operation from other parties, all the constitutional stuff will get chucked in the second term (i.e. things to be permanently forgotten about) skip. That's electoral reform, Lords reform - and independence referendums.
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
Nobody sane thinks they should be in Government any more. They need to go and go now.
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
I think they should be.
Calling people who have different views to you not "sane" isn't kind or sensible. I can respect others have different opinions to me, why can't you?
We all have our own reasons for thinking the way we do. If we all thought the same, life would be very boring!
I can remember when Gove was often described by left-of-centre PBers as the most unsuitable person to lead the party. That was when there was a chance of him getting the position.
Yeah. But May, Boris then Truss has shifted the parameters of "most unsuitable" quite radically.
Who has the authority to rise above the current troubles and put a Tory cabinet together accepted by the various factions? It’s a hard ask. I imagine that Sunak and Johnson are both unacceptable to someone. So who is the John Major candidate?
Wallace? May (again)? Gove? Patel? Javid?
Is there another veteran? Could William Hague do it from the Lords like Sir ADH? Truss’s biggest asset is that the unifying candidate does not exist.
Despite all the excitability on here over the last week, I don't think the Tory party will split, or that Truss will be defenestrated (Kwarteng, possibly). Things will gradually calm down.
I'm quietly confident that Truss will lead the Tories into a 2024 GE as PM. And lose.
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
Nobody sane thinks they should be in Government any more. They need to go and go now.
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
I think they should be.
Calling people who have different views to you not "sane" isn't kind or sensible. I can respect others have different opinions to me, why can't you?
We all have our own reasons for thinking the way we do. If we all thought the same, life would be very boring!
Respect diversity.
You spent many years telling us how insane people were to support Corbyn's plans. Now you support them because the woman wears a blue rosette and has a choker around her neck
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Well, obviously, if Labour wins outright and doesn't need any meaningful co-operation from other parties, all the constitutional stuff will get chucked in the second term (i.e. things to be permanently forgotten about) skip. That's electoral reform, Lords reform - and independence referendums.
In total solidarity with the Tories Starmer has already chucked indy referendums in the skip, so no change there.
NHS watch: district nurse caring for octogenarian mother-in-law called ambulance for her at 7:15pm last night. Ambulance arrived at 3am. As of two minutes ago, ambulance was still sat outside hospital with MIL in back of it, being fed tea and biscuits. She's not suffering an acute, immediately life-threatening condition, thank God, but it shows what an absolutely dire state these services are in.
This is before the annual epidemic of old people falling over in Winter, plus flu, plus Covid, plus the developing wave of untreated conditions left to worsen during lockdowns, and all those who'll be made sick by being forced to go cold and/or hungry. Plus, it would now seem, the additional burden of frozen budgets and working age benefits.
It's a matter of immediate necessity to get rid of this Government but the fact is that, unless enough Conservative turkeys vote for Christmas in the Commons, they'll be sat there, immovable, until January 2025. More likely than not we've got over two years of this acute dysfunction and systemic collapse left to come. There'll be nothing left for Labour to put back together again at this rate.
This was my hospital last week. Each ambulance was unable to unload and had a patient in the back.
I counted 24.
That’s shit. It is patchy though. RUH in Bath no issues when I was there.
Which makes me wonder about the state of the non hospital NHS around Leicester. The phenomenon of A&E becoming the last resort when the GPs and other facilities have become overloaded has been seen many times.
For those gloomy about the future of the NHS, I think there are many possibilities. One, for example, is the possible massive reduction in cost, size and operator skill for medical monitoring equipment.
A chap I know is working on a contract for the US army - to reduce the room full of stuff they wire a critical patient up to, to first a couple of backpacks and then… well there is is no limit to how small they will try and go. The idea is, initially, to have the system in all med evac helicopters. Then to medics in the field.
They’ve a long way to go - but the other thing is the potential cost reduction. The existing equipment costs a fortune. If they can get a system that is practical for mass production….
Quite. In the case on here this morning, nurse worries about sepsis, makes the correct call to get patient to hospital. Imagine if a monitor could be used to report to the clinic about the patients vitals and avoid moving her and at the same time keep watching for sepsis. Tea and biscuits at home. A laudable aim.
Who has the authority to rise above the current troubles and put a Tory cabinet together accepted by the various factions? It’s a hard ask. I imagine that Sunak and Johnson are both unacceptable to someone. So who is the John Major candidate?
Wallace? May (again)? Gove? Patel? Javid?
Is there another veteran? Could William Hague do it from the Lords like Sir ADH? Truss’s biggest asset is that the unifying candidate does not exist.
The problem with selecting a leader who can just limp along to the election and try and salvage some seats is why would voters support them if they are then going to be replaced by another nutter
The gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey has.
Independence 52% Devolution (the status quo) 38% Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%
I will continue to focus on my goals. Feel free to focus on yours.
Yes but it's boring reading it, it's the same post over and over again.
I know nothing about you beyond Independence. What do you enjoy doing?
Oy, Horse. Kettle meets pot. How many times have you posted 20% nailed on FFS?
Yeah but I was right - and I told people how to make money. Stuart is pointless
He really isn’t.
This is a betting site and he posts quite a bit of analysis on the regional splits on polls and his commentary on Scotland electorally, especially with regards to a labour majority betting, is well worth reading.
Who has the authority to rise above the current troubles and put a Tory cabinet together accepted by the various factions? It’s a hard ask. I imagine that Sunak and Johnson are both unacceptable to someone. So who is the John Major candidate?
Wallace? May (again)? Gove? Patel? Javid?
Is there another veteran? Could William Hague do it from the Lords like Sir ADH? Truss’s biggest asset is that the unifying candidate does not exist.
The problem with selecting a leader who can just limp along to the election and try and salvage some seats is why would voters support them if they are then going to be replaced by another nutter
Kevin Rudd had this job and did it pretty well in Aus.
The government is to shell out a lot of money to support peoples' energy bills. This has activated the scammers. Here's a text message that came to my iPhone out of the blue:
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: https://energy.support-rebate.com
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
"The first job of an MP is to act in the interest of their constituents & in the national interest. We cannot clap for carers one month & cut tax for millionaires months later."
Framing the abolition of an income tax band that was intended to be a temporary measure when it was introduced as a "cut tax for millionaires" shows how much the Tory party has ceased to be a party of aspiration.
Oh don't be so silly. A real party of aspiration would be one which tried to make life better for the vast majority of its citizens so that they had decent public services they could rely on, wages that enabled them to live without having to rely on food banks, the realistic possibility of buying a home, of building up savings and so on. Not one which thinks that the only people that matter are its very rich donors.
Julian Smith gets it. His party's leadership and the party members who voted for Truss do not.
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Didn't Tony Blair say the same thing? Although he did get a second term and didn't do it.
He did actually do the biggest reform of the House of Lords for generations.
Nevertheless, Starmer is rapidly removing all the reasons for traditional Conservatives not to vote for him (it's not the issue of constitutional reform per se, but the pushing out of Labour ideological issues in favour of things that actually matter).
I reckon increasingly the only reason why Conservatives might think twice at the moment is internal Labour party leadership rules. The concern is that on the back of Conservative collapse and Labour landslide that the rules may not offer sufficient protection from the leader against a left wing insurrection. The narrative (now for many othordoxy about the 1997 victory) that taking contentious left wing populist measures off the table was not necessary to produce election victory.
The gold-standard British Social Attitudes Survey has.
Independence 52% Devolution (the status quo) 38% Direct rule (the status quo ante) 8%
I will continue to focus on my goals. Feel free to focus on yours.
Yes but it's boring reading it, it's the same post over and over again.
I know nothing about you beyond Independence. What do you enjoy doing?
Oy, Horse. Kettle meets pot. How many times have you posted 20% nailed on FFS?
Yeah but I was right - and I told people how to make money. Stuart is pointless
He really isn’t.
This is a betting site and he posts quite a bit of analysis on the regional splits on polls and his commentary on Scotland electorally, especially with regards to a labour majority betting, is well worth reading.
I can remember when Gove was often described by left-of-centre PBers as the most unsuitable person to lead the party. That was when there was a chance of him getting the position.
That's how it works. You can bet @SouthamObserver would change his tune if Gove looked like winning and same with @Jonathan for Wallace.
Nevertheless I'm now looking at 40/1 for Gove as next PM and 25/1 for Wallace with interest.
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Didn't Tony Blair say the same thing? Although he did get a second term and didn't do it.
He did actually do the biggest reform of the House of Lords for generations.
Nevertheless, Starmer is rapidly removing all the reasons for traditional Conservatives not to vote for him (it's not the issue of constitutional reform per se, but the pushing out of Labour ideological issues in favour of things that actually matter).
I reckon increasingly the only reason why Conservatives might think twice at the moment is internal Labour party leadership rules. The concern is that on the back of Conservative collapse and Labour landslide that the rules may not offer sufficient protection from the leader against a left wing insurrection. The narrative (now for many othordoxy about the 1997 victory) that taking contentious left wing populist measures off the table was not necessary to produce election victory.
Not true.
In Government the MPs vote in the Labour Leader. They will not ever vote in a leftist.
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
Nobody sane thinks they should be in Government any more. They need to go and go now.
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
I think they should be.
Calling people who have different views to you not "sane" isn't kind or sensible. I can respect others have different opinions to me, why can't you?
We all have our own reasons for thinking the way we do. If we all thought the same, life would be very boring!
Respect diversity.
You spent many years telling us how insane people were to support Corbyn's plans. Now you support them because the woman wears a blue rosette and has a choker around her neck
The government is to shell out a lot of money to support peoples' energy bills. This has activated the scammers. Here's a text message that came to my iPhone out of the blue:
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: https://energy.support-rebate.com
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
Was that the actual link (ie. what showed when your mouse hovers over it), or just how the link was shown on your screen?
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
Nobody sane thinks they should be in Government any more. They need to go and go now.
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
I think they should be.
Calling people who have different views to you not "sane" isn't kind or sensible. I can respect others have different opinions to me, why can't you?
We all have our own reasons for thinking the way we do. If we all thought the same, life would be very boring!
Respect diversity.
You spent many years telling us how insane people were to support Corbyn's plans. Now you support them because the woman wears a blue rosette and has a choker around her neck
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Didn't Tony Blair say the same thing? Although he did get a second term and didn't do it.
He did actually do the biggest reform of the House of Lords for generations.
Nevertheless, Starmer is rapidly removing all the reasons for traditional Conservatives not to vote for him (it's not the issue of constitutional reform per se, but the pushing out of Labour ideological issues in favour of things that actually matter).
I reckon increasingly the only reason why Conservatives might think twice at the moment is internal Labour party leadership rules. The concern is that on the back of Conservative collapse and Labour landslide that the rules may not offer sufficient protection from the leader against a left wing insurrection. The narrative (now for many othordoxy about the 1997 victory) that taking contentious left wing populist measures off the table was not necessary to produce election victory.
Not true.
In Government the MPs vote in the Labour Leader. They will not ever vote in a leftist.
Eco zealot, 21, who poured human FAECES on Captain Sir Tom memorial could face criminal charges
Oh I see, cancel culture is okay as long as it's something we don't like
There are two potential issues here: creating a hazard to public health, and outraging public decency. Throwing human excrement about simply isn't an acceptable form of protest full stop; the argument about defacing public monuments is more nuanced (if pouring the slop all over a Captain Tom memorial is acceptable behaviour then where is the line to be drawn: do the same standards also apply, for example, to the Cenotaph, to people's graves, to places of worship or to primary schools?)
Or, to put it another way, where does legitimate protest end and destructive, attention seeking narcissism begin?
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
Nobody sane thinks they should be in Government any more. They need to go and go now.
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
I think they should be.
Calling people who have different views to you not "sane" isn't kind or sensible. I can respect others have different opinions to me, why can't you?
We all have our own reasons for thinking the way we do. If we all thought the same, life would be very boring!
Respect diversity.
You spent many years telling us how insane people were to support Corbyn's plans. Now you support them because the woman wears a blue rosette and has a choker around her neck
No I did not.
I never once called Corbyns supporters insane.
Why do you make this stuff up?
You called us anti-Semites.
No, I did not. That is not true at all.
I called Corbyn and some of his supporters anti Semites. Which is correct, and even you say the same now.
I would never call all Labour voters the same thing. I believe people are individual not a label so why would I?
Truss is speaking lower and lower. Same BS as when Thatcher decided to speak like a man. So even now she is cosplaying Thatcha.
She can’t be far off a mental breakdown. Surely the “retiring on health grounds” gambit is being considered in the upper echelons of The Establishment? It is the only reasonably graceful way out for her now.
A pregnancy?
Not if rumours of preferred behaviour are true, like the newly wed Greek bride.
Apropos of nothing at all, apparently the oldest known recorded joke is about Sumerian newlyweds and anal sex.
The government is to shell out a lot of money to support peoples' energy bills. This has activated the scammers. Here's a text message that came to my iPhone out of the blue:
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: https://energy.support-rebate.com
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
Was that the actual link (ie. what showed when your mouse hovers over it), or just how the link was shown on your screen?
It was what showed on the iPhone screen, but I typed it into my Macbook browser feeling that I have more control there in a "private window".
The little one (Don't worry she's fine) had a very small fall a couple of days back. Called 111, everything was completely fine but at the end they said to phone GP. Called GP, after 70 minutes waiting; GP said to go to A&E ! Paediatric section of A&E reminded me of the old GP system where you just went in and queues. 2 hours in total, junior fine everything fine.
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Didn't Tony Blair say the same thing? Although he did get a second term and didn't do it.
He did actually do the biggest reform of the House of Lords for generations.
Nevertheless, Starmer is rapidly removing all the reasons for traditional Conservatives not to vote for him (it's not the issue of constitutional reform per se, but the pushing out of Labour ideological issues in favour of things that actually matter).
I reckon increasingly the only reason why Conservatives might think twice at the moment is internal Labour party leadership rules. The concern is that on the back of Conservative collapse and Labour landslide that the rules may not offer sufficient protection from the leader against a left wing insurrection. The narrative (now for many othordoxy about the 1997 victory) that taking contentious left wing populist measures off the table was not necessary to produce election victory.
Not true.
In Government the MPs vote in the Labour Leader. They will not ever vote in a leftist.
Panic flapping about the theoretical prospect of the Labour Party installing another loon mid-term, given what the Conservative Party has actually just gone and done, is laughable.
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Didn't Tony Blair say the same thing? Although he did get a second term and didn't do it.
He did actually do the biggest reform of the House of Lords for generations.
Nevertheless, Starmer is rapidly removing all the reasons for traditional Conservatives not to vote for him (it's not the issue of constitutional reform per se, but the pushing out of Labour ideological issues in favour of things that actually matter).
I reckon increasingly the only reason why Conservatives might think twice at the moment is internal Labour party leadership rules. The concern is that on the back of Conservative collapse and Labour landslide that the rules may not offer sufficient protection from the leader against a left wing insurrection. The narrative (now for many othordoxy about the 1997 victory) that taking contentious left wing populist measures off the table was not necessary to produce election victory.
Not true.
In Government the MPs vote in the Labour Leader. They will not ever vote in a leftist.
Huh, this is different to when I last read it, TIL.
I think however there is little chance of a majority of a conference voting for a vote for a new leader. Odd that Starmer hasn't already changed this rule as he has a majority on the NEC.
A chap I know is working on a contract for the US army - to reduce the room full of stuff they wire a critical patient up to, to first a couple of backpacks and then… well there is is no limit to how small they will try and go. The idea is, initially, to have the system in all med evac helicopters. Then to medics in the field.
US CASEVAC in Iraq was outstanding largely because the commanders made it a priority. They got 90% of casualties into care in under an hour and their wounded to killed ratio was 11:1 versus the historic number of 4:1.
We got waved off CASEVACs more than once because the guy holding his guts in after a close encounter with an IED wanted to be lifted out by the US...
Starmer is absolutely ruthless in his determination to win, which is why he's knocking back any proposals that he thinks could be damaging in a GE campaign.
The obvious example is voting reform. Conference voted for it. Starmer overruled, saying "it's not a priority". Why? Because he fears it could become a distraction (potentially negative) in a GE campaign. Same logic for Scottish independence, House of Lords reform, and lots of other stuff. He's got Labour standing to the national anthem in silence while ditching any radical hobby horses. It seems to be working.
The government is to shell out a lot of money to support peoples' energy bills. This has activated the scammers. Here's a text message that came to my iPhone out of the blue:
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: https://energy.support-rebate.com
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
Was that the actual link (ie. what showed when your mouse hovers over it), or just how the link was shown on your screen?
It was what showed on the iPhone screen, but I typed it into my Macbook browser feeling that I have more control there in a "private window".
Obviously it sounds like a scam, because there is (i believe) no need to apply for the support under this scheme (it is supposed to happen automatically through your energy supplier).
But (and i may be wrong here) i thought that cyber security training normally indicates https addresses as a sign of safety/security (don't know why).
Each time I think that people are overreacting to the current troubles in the Tory party, Liz Truss pops up and does an interview that confirms that they have a very significant problem.
Nobody sane thinks they should be in Government any more. They need to go and go now.
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
I think they should be.
Calling people who have different views to you not "sane" isn't kind or sensible. I can respect others have different opinions to me, why can't you?
We all have our own reasons for thinking the way we do. If we all thought the same, life would be very boring!
Respect diversity.
This isn't diversity. There are two significant issues for you: 1. The consensus of the global financial markets is that the Truss plan is economically crazy 2. The consensus of the UK voter is that the Truss plan is immoral
So whilst its fine for you to hold your views, you have to accept that you are saying the markets are wrong about economics, and the voters are wrong about morality.
The little one (Don't worry she's fine) had a very small fall a couple of days back. Called 111, everything was completely fine but at the end they said to phone GP. Called GP, after 70 minutes waiting; GP said to go to A&E ! Paediatric section of A&E reminded me of the old GP system where you just went in and queues. 2 hours in total, junior fine everything fine.
Some of the issues are caution related. No one wants to make a mistake that could have serious consequences. 111 are not medics, they follow. A script based system. If anything flags it will direct to further care, GP or A&E. GP will be cautious too. Was this 2 hours wasted? No. 2 hours to make sure nothing was wrong, which was the right thing to do.
I can remember when Gove was often described by left-of-centre PBers as the most unsuitable person to lead the party. That was when there was a chance of him getting the position.
Yeah. But May, Boris then Truss has shifted the parameters of "most unsuitable" quite radically.
Gove made himself unelectable when he sank his political knife in Boris's back. After that, who would ever trust him again? Or believe anything he said?
The government is to shell out a lot of money to support peoples' energy bills. This has activated the scammers. Here's a text message that came to my iPhone out of the blue:
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: https://energy.support-rebate.com
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
Was that the actual link (ie. what showed when your mouse hovers over it), or just how the link was shown on your screen?
It was what showed on the iPhone screen, but I typed it into my Macbook browser feeling that I have more control there in a "private window".
Obviously it sounds like a scam, because there is (i believe) no need to apply for the support under this scheme (it is supposed to happen automatically through your energy supplier).
But (and i may be wrong here) i thought that cyber security training normally indicates https addresses as a sign of safety/security (don't know why).
HTTPS doesn't mean a site isn't going to steal your details. It just means they are securely stealing your details in this case
I can remember when Gove was often described by left-of-centre PBers as the most unsuitable person to lead the party. That was when there was a chance of him getting the position.
Yeah. But May, Boris then Truss has shifted the parameters of "most unsuitable" quite radically.
It's a bit like Michael Howard, isn't it? In normal times he'd be a bad option - unpopular with the public, idiosyncratic and a bit odd when obviously, in an ideal world you have a leader who's well liked, a good chairperson who can take on board different ideas but prune the bad and unpopular ones, and salesperson for the overall Conservative programme rather than a bit of a zealot (who nonetheless seems to have mellowed). But if you're looking for someone to pick up the pieces from a disaster caused by even bigger zealots who are also incompetents, then an experienced hand who actually gives the impression he understands the policies he's advocating, does look like an improvement and someone who could at least shore up the Conservative base, if not make many inroads into swing voters who now look lost to the party.
The government is to shell out a lot of money to support peoples' energy bills. This has activated the scammers. Here's a text message that came to my iPhone out of the blue:
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: [redacted]
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
Then for God's sake don't reproduce the link here so other people can click on it! Web pages which make browsers crash are bad news, because it often means the web page is trying to exploit a bug in the browser that it can use to install malware on your device. Tricking you into providing your info is not the only bad thing that can happen on malicious internet pages...
The government is to shell out a lot of money to support peoples' energy bills. This has activated the scammers. Here's a text message that came to my iPhone out of the blue:
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: https://energy.support-rebate.com
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
Was that the actual link (ie. what showed when your mouse hovers over it), or just how the link was shown on your screen?
It was what showed on the iPhone screen, but I typed it into my Macbook browser feeling that I have more control there in a "private window".
Obviously it sounds like a scam, because there is (i believe) no need to apply for the support under this scheme (it is supposed to happen automatically through your energy supplier).
But (and i may be wrong here) i thought that cyber security training normally indicates https addresses as a sign of safety/security (don't know why).
HTTPS doesn't mean a site isn't going to steal your details. It just means they are securely stealing your details in this case
All Https does is secure the connection between your web browser and the final website - which simply means no-one in the middle can steal your details - it doesn't stop the website owner stealing and abusing them...
Can a shortlist be drawn up of all these plans that will turn out to be 'second term issues'?
Didn't Tony Blair say the same thing? Although he did get a second term and didn't do it.
He did actually do the biggest reform of the House of Lords for generations.
Nevertheless, Starmer is rapidly removing all the reasons for traditional Conservatives not to vote for him (it's not the issue of constitutional reform per se, but the pushing out of Labour ideological issues in favour of things that actually matter).
I reckon increasingly the only reason why Conservatives might think twice at the moment is internal Labour party leadership rules. The concern is that on the back of Conservative collapse and Labour landslide that the rules may not offer sufficient protection from the leader against a left wing insurrection. The narrative (now for many othordoxy about the 1997 victory) that taking contentious left wing populist measures off the table was not necessary to produce election victory.
Not true.
In Government the MPs vote in the Labour Leader. They will not ever vote in a leftist.
Panic flapping about the theoretical prospect of the Labour Party installing another loon mid-term, given what the Conservative Party has actually just gone and done, is laughable.
Don't disagree. Just saying that it is the only obvious reason for a Conservative not to be pretty relaxed about a Labour Government right now. I think a few (Tory) people on here have said it's not domestic policy that is the concern so much (Corbyn's plans in that respect can hardly be said to stand up disastrously compared to Truss/Kwasinomics right now). It's more defence related foreign policy. Starmer is fine on that.
Comments
Keir Starmer (LAB): 38% (+13)
Liz Truss (CON): 18%
Ed Davey (LDM): 17% (=)
Kwasi Kwarteng (CON): 15%
via @OpiniumResearch, 27-30 Sep
(Changes with 2 Sep)
If a Tory leader was at the top now we'd be saying how long the other parties had left.
We might genuinely see a Tory Party split.
Before the Thatcher revolution started in 1979, this particular leafy corner of the world used to return Labour MPs. There's still a plaque on one of the local buildings commemorating when Shirley Williams opened it.
Sometimes there are paradigm shifts when everything in the political landscape changes dramatically. If it can happen in Scotland it can happen here.
https://twitter.com/juliansmithuk/status/1576484558677032960?s=21&t=IXmkv3J3mh2H4x9n0j-vJQ
"The first job of an MP is to act in the interest of their constituents & in the national interest. We cannot clap for carers one month & cut tax for millionaires months later."
I know nothing about you beyond Independence. What do you enjoy doing?
This is the problem with allowing party selectorates to choose the Prime minister. At least Brown and May had coronations. Johnson had a general election within months.
Individual votes on specific measures will be taken I think.
Incredible moment.
Or more likely 45p will be pulled before it gets near the floor of the House.
One wonders if this was always going to be the end result but it feels like they are definitely going to lose next time.
Realistically the party will remove her before that happens. She's been a disaster for both party and country.
Eco zealot, 21, who poured human FAECES on Captain Sir Tom memorial could face criminal charges
Oh I see, cancel culture is okay as long as it's something we don't like
This was all predicted, the Tory Party needs to go away now.
But that's not the stated aim here is it?
Do something stupid, face the consequences? How is that anything to do with cancel culture?
By way of example, it was a news story in Japan when they announced that they were going to lift the 50% bed occupancy ceiling for declaring an emergancy during the Covid epidemic. They must look at us & think we’re insane.
1) the other day somebody mentioned that by convention a (proper) budget comes into force automatically, and the Finance Act is passed to legitimise it in statute. So it makes sense that failure to pass the Finance Act creates a constitutional issue of the level that forces the bringing down of the (King's) Government. This explains why sometimes a Finance Act is actually officially passed after some measures have actually come into force on (usually) 5th April.
2) it's all linked to the reason why Parliament exists going back to (at least) the 13th century. Ie. the purpose of the convening of Parliament by the monarch was to raise funds (usually to fight wars). So officially the raising of taxation still falls under the (historical) Royal Prerogative but without the force of law the Govt (/King) lack the means of enforcement.
People look at the comparable wages and conditions in supermarkets and the Public Sector can't recruit.
It is the free market.
Quite why their theory is that what it needs is a pay freeze remains something of a mystery.
It's the overall ideological dogma and cavalier economic recklessness of the package, combined with obstinacy and awful communication and political skills, that get me.
https://twitter.com/JackElsom/status/1576488761168343040
The Tory Party is braindead, look at Liz's approval even now!
For those gloomy about the future of the NHS, I think there are many possibilities. One, for example, is the possible massive reduction in cost, size and operator skill for medical monitoring equipment.
A chap I know is working on a contract for the US army - to reduce the room full of stuff they wire a critical patient up to, to first a couple of backpacks and then… well there is is no limit to how small they will try and go. The idea is, initially, to have the system in all med evac helicopters. Then to medics in the field.
They’ve a long way to go - but the other thing is the potential cost reduction. The existing equipment costs a fortune. If they can get a system that is practical for mass production….
Maybe in 10 years I might vote for them again as I have in the past - but right now they're making 2005 Howard look sensible.
https://twitter.com/NadineDorries/status/1576506779898609665
https://twitter.com/anushkaasthana/status/1576481046228766721
Truss attempting to do the same would be very, very brave.
The Government's economic plan, in short, consists of asking the great mass of the people to bear with the process of being impoverished, frozen, starved and denied prompt medical treatment for a few years, whilst ministers seek to re-float the British economy on a great wave of VAT receipts from sales of Champagne, foie gras and mink coats. Only ministers and their most delusional or plain stupid backers think that this has any realistic prospect of success.
You can argue whether that was right or wrong till the cows come home, but one of the consequences has been a collapse in social care provision, which is having exactly the kind of knock on effects on the rest of the system that you would expect & would have been obvious to anyone with half a brain.
Putting NI back to the rate at the last election OTOH absolutely does match the manifesto which pledged not to increase the rate. It was the tax rise that broke the manifesto, not reversing that breach.
Nevertheless he'd be far more effective than Truss.
Calling people who have different views to you not "sane" isn't kind or sensible. I can respect others have different opinions to me, why can't you?
We all have our own reasons for thinking the way we do. If we all thought the same, life would be very boring!
Respect diversity.
But May, Boris then Truss has shifted the parameters of "most unsuitable" quite radically.
Day 221 of my 3 day war. I played my gas card so early Europe stocked up for winter and I mobilized so late that my conscripts will freeze in it.
I remain a master strategist.
Wallace?
May (again)?
Gove?
Patel?
Javid?
Is there another veteran? Could William Hague do it from the Lords like Sir ADH? Truss’s biggest asset is that the unifying candidate does not exist.
I'm quietly confident that Truss will lead the Tories into a 2024 GE as PM.
And lose.
It’s not only Credit Suisse that seem to have issues.
https://twitter.com/macleodfinance/status/1576491265218134016?s=21&t=BcIK2DspgtU4UTKBdurAHg
This is a betting site and he posts quite a bit of analysis on the regional splits on polls and his commentary on Scotland electorally, especially with regards to a labour majority betting, is well worth reading.
GOV.UK: You are eligible for a discounted energy bill under the Energy Bills Support Scheme. You can apply here: https://energy.support-rebate.com
Clicking on that address in my Macbook appeared to cause my browser (Safari) to "quit unexpectedly".
Julian Smith gets it. His party's leadership and the party members who voted for Truss do not.
Nevertheless, Starmer is rapidly removing all the reasons for traditional Conservatives not to vote for him (it's not the issue of constitutional reform per se, but the pushing out of Labour ideological issues in favour of things that actually matter).
I reckon increasingly the only reason why Conservatives might think twice at the moment is internal Labour party leadership rules. The concern is that on the back of Conservative collapse and Labour landslide that the rules may not offer sufficient protection from the leader against a left wing insurrection. The narrative (now for many othordoxy about the 1997 victory) that taking contentious left wing populist measures off the table was not necessary to produce election victory.
Nevertheless I'm now looking at 40/1 for Gove as next PM and 25/1 for Wallace with interest.
In Government the MPs vote in the Labour Leader. They will not ever vote in a leftist.
I never once called Corbyns supporters insane.
Why do you make this stuff up?
And Truss's plans are nothing like Corbyn's.
She’s dumping on the Chancellor.
Gove wants to turn off the engine.
This is a blue-on-blue fight to the death.
https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/1576492374695415808
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/labour-party-leadership-contests
Or, to put it another way, where does legitimate protest end and destructive, attention seeking narcissism begin?
I called Corbyn and some of his supporters anti Semites. Which is correct, and even you say the same now.
I would never call all Labour voters the same thing. I believe people are individual not a label so why would I?
Plus ça change...
Paediatric section of A&E reminded me of the old GP system where you just went in and queues. 2 hours in total, junior fine everything fine.
I think however there is little chance of a majority of a conference voting for a vote for a new leader. Odd that Starmer hasn't already changed this rule as he has a majority on the NEC.
We got waved off CASEVACs more than once because the guy holding his guts in after a close encounter with an IED wanted to be lifted out by the US...
The obvious example is voting reform. Conference voted for it. Starmer overruled, saying "it's not a priority". Why? Because he fears it could become a distraction (potentially negative) in a GE campaign. Same logic for Scottish independence, House of Lords reform, and lots of other stuff. He's got Labour standing to the national anthem in silence while ditching any radical hobby horses. It seems to be working.
But (and i may be wrong here) i thought that cyber security training normally indicates https addresses as a sign of safety/security (don't know why).
1. The consensus of the global financial markets is that the Truss plan is economically crazy
2. The consensus of the UK voter is that the Truss plan is immoral
So whilst its fine for you to hold your views, you have to accept that you are saying the markets are wrong about economics, and the voters are wrong about morality.
Was this 2 hours wasted? No. 2 hours to make sure nothing was wrong, which was the right thing to do.