Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

A LAB majority still longer than evens in the betting – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited October 9 in General
imageA LAB majority still longer than evens in the betting – politicalbetting.com

Inevitably given the polling since Truss became the prime minister the betting has moved to LAB to win a majority at the next general election. But even though some polls have them at 33% ahead of the Tories punters still make a Labour majority longer than evens

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,767
    edited October 7
    First like Arsenal (maybe if I keep getting firsts on PB, Arsenal will stay top of the league).
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,449
    2nd like Liverpool. Or maybe Glasgow.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    This is still value, for those who didn't listen to me at 6/1.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,042
    Whilstever the Tories can still change their PM and Cabinet, rightly so.....
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    SKS is going to slaughter her. That pause--cogs whir--The energy package which was the centrepiece of our mini budget--response is not going to get her through 6 questions.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,471
    IshmaelZ said:

    This is still value, for those who didn't listen to me at 6/1.

    You may well be right. I think it was more 5/1, and thus 6s on BF when you suggested it though wasn't it?
  • 2nd like Liverpool. Or maybe Glasgow.

    Liverpool beats Glasgow for the second time this week..
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 11,232

    Whilstever the Tories can still change their PM and Cabinet, rightly so.....

    Hyufd has the right idea. The Party should simply make Wallace PM and Sunak CoE. It would still lose the next GE but it is nevertheless the best route out of this mess.

    Would it be possible though? Would the Party accept it? And more to the point would Wallace and Sunak agree?

    I'm far from sure.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Omnium said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    This is still value, for those who didn't listen to me at 6/1.

    You may well be right. I think it was more 5/1, and thus 6s on BF when you suggested it though wasn't it?
    Frankly I have no idea, You would have to ask @kinabalu who reminded me of this magisterial recommendation. But as I am on at 5, not 6, you are probably right.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited October 7
    It was Tory MPs who put Truss in the last 2. Most Tory members wanted Badenoch. They could have put Mordaunt through to face Sunak in the membership vote too instead of Truss
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Whilstever the Tories can still change their PM and Cabinet, rightly so.....

    Hyufd has the right idea. The Party should simply make Wallace PM and Sunak CoE. It would still lose the next GE but it is nevertheless the best route out of this mess.

    Would it be possible though? Would the Party accept it? And more to the point would Wallace and Sunak agree?

    I'm far from sure.
    Liz could counter by threatening to ask for a dissolution. Let's remind ourselves of the Lascelles principles: KC could refuse

    1. if the existing Parliament is still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",
    2. if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and
    3. if the sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons".

    1. is questionable and 2. it would be the best thing that could happen to the national economy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    IshmaelZ said:

    Whilstever the Tories can still change their PM and Cabinet, rightly so.....

    Hyufd has the right idea. The Party should simply make Wallace PM and Sunak CoE. It would still lose the next GE but it is nevertheless the best route out of this mess.

    Would it be possible though? Would the Party accept it? And more to the point would Wallace and Sunak agree?

    I'm far from sure.
    Liz could counter by threatening to ask for a dissolution. Let's remind ourselves of the Lascelles principles: KC could refuse

    1. if the existing Parliament is still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",
    2. if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and
    3. if the sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons".

    1. is questionable and 2. it would be the best thing that could happen to the national economy.
    As long as the Tories agreed a replacement leader by coronation Charles would agree to make that new leader PM given the Tory majority in the Commons
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,576
    Matt Goodwin, readable, excellent and wrong on the subject of 'The space for a new party'. His answer: Yes. There is space for a populist, anti-intellectual, anti-liberal, entirely self interested and inward looking party that achieves contradictory aims simultaneously and looks a bit like UKIP.

    Thankfully there isn't.

    https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-space-for-a-new-party-in-britain?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email


  • BournvilleBournville Posts: 237
    Welp, just got The Email from my landlord telling me the rent on my shoebox tower block bedroom is going up by 25%. Cheers Liz
  • stodgestodge Posts: 11,000
    FPT - WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO ME?

    Evening all :)

    As is so often the case, I'm late to the debate on today's polling about which I have a few thoughts.

    The 38 Degrees poll for London (Lab 59, Con 22, LD 13) isn't as wild as it sounds - other recent London polling has shown enormous Labour leads.

    In December 2019, Labour won 48% of the vote, the Conservatives 32% and the LDs 15% - that translated to 49 seats for Labour, 21 for the Conservatives and 3 for the Liberal Democrats and while that was the same as after 2017 that masked quite a bit of churn.

    The new poll shows a 10.5% swing from Conservative to Labour (compared with the national 20% swing indicated by Redfield & Wilton for example).

    Of the current 20 London Conservative seats, some of the sitting MPs face LD challengers who ran on a strong anti-Brexit ticket in 2019 and I just need convincing that's going to be possible to repeat. Wimbledon, for instance, was a Labour seat in the Blair years and might well be so again if the LD 2019 vote proves to be a chimera.

    As for Julia Lopez, a 20% swing in Hornchurch & Upminster would reduce her 23,000 majority to something like 1,500 but she'd survive. Conversely, for all the poll swing, the evidence from the local elections is the LDs won't drop Richmond Park, Twickenham or Kington & Surbiton (you know the old phrase " to lose one leader at a General Election might be considered foolish, to lose two..."). The Conservatives might drop a former leader in Uxbridge & South Ruislip I suppose (if he stands).

    Nonetheless, if the London swing is 10% and the national swing is above 15% there must be huge swings elsewhere - last night's local by-elections, by definition a small and wholly unrepresentative sample (up there with Scottish sub samples in truth), were very good for Labour but superficially less so for the LDs.

    A rampant Labour Party may well perversely help the Conservatives enabling it to hold seats which might otherwise have gone LD - I can't imagine Starmer would be too bothered if his majority were 200 or 300 but I'd argue a Conservative Party with 150 seats would be in a better shape than one with 100 seats inasmuch as it would have survived an existential threat. The most extreme polling this week has toyed with the Conservatives not just being the third party in the Commons (behind the SNP) but perhaps the fourth (behind the LDs). The latter would be the existential threat, not the former, catastrophic though the former would be).
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103

    Welp, just got The Email from my landlord telling me the rent on my shoebox tower block bedroom is going up by 25%. Cheers Liz

    Sorry to hear that. Outrageous increase.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Welp, just got The Email from my landlord telling me the rent on my shoebox tower block bedroom is going up by 25%. Cheers Liz

    Shit. Sympathies.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 32,048
    Re. the story on the previous thread about a shooting outside a police station in Ascot Drive, Derby: I used to know that area very well (my dad did lots of business there), but I did not know there was a police station on that road. The area's changed a great deal since then, but I cannot find a police station there on the Derbyshire Police website (unless I'm being thick...)

    https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/contact/find-a-police-station/

    There's always been a fire station at the Osmaston Road end, though. So where is it?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    IshmaelZ said:

    Whilstever the Tories can still change their PM and Cabinet, rightly so.....

    Hyufd has the right idea. The Party should simply make Wallace PM and Sunak CoE. It would still lose the next GE but it is nevertheless the best route out of this mess.

    Would it be possible though? Would the Party accept it? And more to the point would Wallace and Sunak agree?

    I'm far from sure.
    Liz could counter by threatening to ask for a dissolution. Let's remind ourselves of the Lascelles principles: KC could refuse

    1. if the existing Parliament is still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",
    2. if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and
    3. if the sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons".

    1. is questionable and 2. it would be the best thing that could happen to the national economy.
    Dissolution I hear?

    Bring it on. Bring it on.

    Labour landslide.

  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,380
    Told you all we'd get Eurovision.
    Not a doubt in my mind!

    (Seriously - bizarre choice. My wife is already moaning about all the grockles she'll get at work)
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,571
    IshmaelZ said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 52% (+2)
    CON: 20% (=)
    LDM: 8% (-1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)
    SNP: 5% (=)
    RFM: 4% (+1)

    Via
    @PeoplePolling
    , 6 Oct.
    Changes w/ 29 Sep.

    Just like after Black Wednesday.

    Far worse than that.

    In 1992, the polls had been drifting blue-to-red all summer, and that drift continued at roughly the same speed. Even at Christmas '92, the score was roughly C33 L48.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election

    Black Wednesday is the classic example of "news doesn't shift the polls".

    The last few weeks have been much much worse than Black Wednesday.
    We await @MoonRabbit 's exclusive analysis of the reasons behind the Tories being 32 points clear, were the numbers reversed
    Your and @CorrectHorseBattery3 ’a repeated attacks on @MoonRabbit Re pretty unpleasant.

    She may be wrong, but she’s interesting

    Still pondering wether I give that post a like 🤣
    Ewe should.
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Things havn’t been this bad since chief judge Cal took over mega city one. If there’s anyone claiming Universal Credit called Arthur A Aardvark, I suggest they pack a bag and flee.


  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    algarkirk said:

    Matt Goodwin, readable, excellent and wrong on the subject of 'The space for a new party'. His answer: Yes. There is space for a populist, anti-intellectual, anti-liberal, entirely self interested and inward looking party that achieves contradictory aims simultaneously and looks a bit like UKIP.

    Thankfully there isn't.

    https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-space-for-a-new-party-in-britain?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email


    UKIP got 12% at the 2015 general election. If Truss adds open door immigration and pro wokeism to her economic libertarianism I could see Farage coming back again to lead RefUK as the final nail in her metaphorical coffin. Centrists now almost all voting Labour or LD
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,044
    algarkirk said:

    Matt Goodwin, readable, excellent and wrong on the subject of 'The space for a new party'. His answer: Yes. There is space for a populist, anti-intellectual, anti-liberal, entirely self interested and inward looking party that achieves contradictory aims simultaneously and looks a bit like UKIP.

    Thankfully there isn't.

    https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-space-for-a-new-party-in-britain?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email


    Why do you think there isn't?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Told you all we'd get Eurovision.
    Not a doubt in my mind!

    (Seriously - bizarre choice. My wife is already moaning about all the grockles she'll get at work)

    Perverse.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,863
    BANG
  • Leon said:

    BANG

    Are you using your left hand again?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,044
    Leon said:

    BANG

    Another North Korean missile?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103

    IshmaelZ said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 52% (+2)
    CON: 20% (=)
    LDM: 8% (-1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)
    SNP: 5% (=)
    RFM: 4% (+1)

    Via
    @PeoplePolling
    , 6 Oct.
    Changes w/ 29 Sep.

    Just like after Black Wednesday.

    Far worse than that.

    In 1992, the polls had been drifting blue-to-red all summer, and that drift continued at roughly the same speed. Even at Christmas '92, the score was roughly C33 L48.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election

    Black Wednesday is the classic example of "news doesn't shift the polls".

    The last few weeks have been much much worse than Black Wednesday.
    We await @MoonRabbit 's exclusive analysis of the reasons behind the Tories being 32 points clear, were the numbers reversed
    Your and @CorrectHorseBattery3 ’a repeated attacks on @MoonRabbit Re pretty unpleasant.

    She may be wrong, but she’s interesting

    Still pondering wether I give that post a like 🤣
    Ewe should.
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Things havn’t been this bad since chief judge Cal took over mega city one. If there’s anyone claiming Universal Credit called Arthur A Aardvark, I suggest they pack a bag and flee.


    Seems to have left out @Leon 's ring on a necklace of doom.

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,576
    Andy_JS said:

    algarkirk said:

    Matt Goodwin, readable, excellent and wrong on the subject of 'The space for a new party'. His answer: Yes. There is space for a populist, anti-intellectual, anti-liberal, entirely self interested and inward looking party that achieves contradictory aims simultaneously and looks a bit like UKIP.

    Thankfully there isn't.

    https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-space-for-a-new-party-in-britain?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email


    Why do you think there isn't?
    1) History - too many epic fails at this

    2) Mood. Basic truthfulness and honest competence is the demand of the day

    3) The Tories are already in the populist position: Defending a bad Brexit to the hilt; spending tax payers and borrowed money like water; filling prisons; sounding off about migration. People have noticed there is a problem with it.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    Sturgeon will add it to the list of grievances I guess.

  • Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.
  • Not sure where this idea I hate Moon has come from, I was one of the people most trying to get her back when she was wrongly banned. To much opposition from some here.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,571
    edited October 7

    IshmaelZ said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 52% (+2)
    CON: 20% (=)
    LDM: 8% (-1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)
    SNP: 5% (=)
    RFM: 4% (+1)

    Via
    @PeoplePolling
    , 6 Oct.
    Changes w/ 29 Sep.

    Just like after Black Wednesday.

    Far worse than that.

    In 1992, the polls had been drifting blue-to-red all summer, and that drift continued at roughly the same speed. Even at Christmas '92, the score was roughly C33 L48.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election

    Black Wednesday is the classic example of "news doesn't shift the polls".

    The last few weeks have been much much worse than Black Wednesday.
    We await @MoonRabbit 's exclusive analysis of the reasons behind the Tories being 32 points clear, were the numbers reversed
    Your and @CorrectHorseBattery3 ’a repeated attacks on @MoonRabbit Re pretty unpleasant.

    She may be wrong, but she’s interesting

    Still pondering wether I give that post a like 🤣
    Ewe should.
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Things havn’t been this bad since chief judge Cal took over mega city one. If there’s anyone claiming Universal Credit called Arthur A Aardvark, I suggest they pack a bag and flee.


    Seems to have left out @Leon 's ring on a necklace of doom.

    Rowson does draw Truss well, she does have these lovely big eyes which move slowly and then rest right on you, and she does have a very French-kissable mouth.

    Best of all is how he captures her vanity and madness.

    The other day RCS asked me, if this is a repeat of the 70s disrupters who ended up changing the world, who is the Keith Joseph? And I replied Truss herself.
  • Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 32,048

    Re. the story on the previous thread about a shooting outside a police station in Ascot Drive, Derby: I used to know that area very well (my dad did lots of business there), but I did not know there was a police station on that road. The area's changed a great deal since then, but I cannot find a police station there on the Derbyshire Police website (unless I'm being thick...)

    https://www.derbyshire.police.uk/contact/find-a-police-station/

    There's always been a fire station at the Osmaston Road end, though. So where is it?

    To follow up my own comment, it's a brand new police station:

    "Following shortcomings identified by Derbyshire Constabulary highlighting their deteriorating station located on Cotton Lane in Derby, a review was initiated to modernise the facilities for future use by the force. The study concluded that building a brand new police station would be much more cost-effective and less intrusive than refurbishing their current headquarters.

    Subsequently, a £9.5m plan was drawn up to build the new police station at Ascot Drive, located towards the city’s south. This would become the central police hub for the area, providing greater access to Derby County’s Pride Park stadium, making match day policing far more efficient."

    https://www.westvillegroup.co.uk/project/ascot-drive-police-station/

    So it's been open since April, and they have not even updated the list of stations on their website. Good luck to any members of the public who attempt to go to the old Cotton Lane station...
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,471
    BBC news channel have just aired a lovely Polly Toybee show. Completely ridiculous.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 11,000

    <
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Whatever is said on here, you can be certain no one in a senior position in the Labour, Lib Dem or any other non-Conservative Party is taking anything for granted. As you've said, if the voters swing, they can swing back and if he's any sense Starmer will continue doing what he's doing (which is basically what Blair did from 1995-97) which relies on two old adages.

    First, never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake (that's elementary politics)
    Second, don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon. This isn't 1945 when Attlee could transform society - in 2024, Starmer will have to convince millions of disillusioned Conservatives the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left.

    The contract he and the Left have unwittingly and unconsciously agreed is the same one Blair obtained - the Left will shut up or play loyal until the votes are counted and the majority is in the bag. If Starmer only wins by 50, he'll have an awkward squad of his own, if he wins by 200, he won't care.

    He will be able to expend a fair bit of public goodwill undoing the excesses of Kwarteng's libertarianism (the wonderful prospect is the electorate, in their good sense, will have forced BOTH the Labour and Conservative Parties to abandon their own extremisms for a generation) before he can even start re-shaping the country. Now, we can hope (or not) Starmer doesn't get derailed by external events as Blair did - the longer in office the more likely that becomes so the argument is be radical quickly.

    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 55,103
    "A U.S. president could order computer giants such as Microsoft, Apple and Google to disable almost every electronic device in Russia, bringing the economy to an instant, grinding halt."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=&authornamef=Edward+Lucas+for+the+Daily+Mail
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 7,876
    Earlier today, @Foxy and I were musing about how Truss could push the Conservative poll ratings even lower.

    Well, the government might be rising to that challenge;

    Plans to give serving military personnel free train travel to attend remembrance services this year have been scrapped, after the government decided the cost would be “too great”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/oct/07/free-train-travel-for-military-to-attend-remembrance-services-scrapped?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    It's a breach of various UN conventions, to which Canada just said: fuck it.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/governor-of-bermuda-update-on-cannabis-licensing-bill
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 24,449

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,556
    Leon said:

    BANG

    Hmm, let me guess, it is Leon...
    Stands for "big ass nubile girl"?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 42,643

    IshmaelZ said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 52% (+2)
    CON: 20% (=)
    LDM: 8% (-1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)
    SNP: 5% (=)
    RFM: 4% (+1)

    Via
    @PeoplePolling
    , 6 Oct.
    Changes w/ 29 Sep.

    Just like after Black Wednesday.

    Far worse than that.

    In 1992, the polls had been drifting blue-to-red all summer, and that drift continued at roughly the same speed. Even at Christmas '92, the score was roughly C33 L48.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election

    Black Wednesday is the classic example of "news doesn't shift the polls".

    The last few weeks have been much much worse than Black Wednesday.
    We await @MoonRabbit 's exclusive analysis of the reasons behind the Tories being 32 points clear, were the numbers reversed
    Your and @CorrectHorseBattery3 ’a repeated attacks on @MoonRabbit Re pretty unpleasant.

    She may be wrong, but she’s interesting

    Still pondering wether I give that post a like 🤣
    Ewe should.
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Things havn’t been this bad since chief judge Cal took over mega city one. If there’s anyone claiming Universal Credit called Arthur A Aardvark, I suggest they pack a bag and flee.


    Seems to have left out @Leon 's ring on a necklace of doom.

    Rowson does draw Truss well, she does have these lovely big eyes which move slowly and then rest right on you, and she does have a very French-kissable mouth.
    Steady on, girl! :open_mouth:
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 24,449
    stodge said:

    <
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Whatever is said on here, you can be certain no one in a senior position in the Labour, Lib Dem or any other non-Conservative Party is taking anything for granted. As you've said, if the voters swing, they can swing back and if he's any sense Starmer will continue doing what he's doing (which is basically what Blair did from 1995-97) which relies on two old adages.

    First, never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake (that's elementary politics)
    Second, don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon. This isn't 1945 when Attlee could transform society - in 2024, Starmer will have to convince millions of disillusioned Conservatives the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left.

    The contract he and the Left have unwittingly and unconsciously agreed is the same one Blair obtained - the Left will shut up or play loyal until the votes are counted and the majority is in the bag. If Starmer only wins by 50, he'll have an awkward squad of his own, if he wins by 200, he won't care.

    He will be able to expend a fair bit of public goodwill undoing the excesses of Kwarteng's libertarianism (the wonderful prospect is the electorate, in their good sense, will have forced BOTH the Labour and Conservative Parties to abandon their own extremisms for a generation) before he can even start re-shaping the country. Now, we can hope (or not) Starmer doesn't get derailed by external events as Blair did - the longer in office the more likely that becomes so the argument is be radical quickly.

    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.
    It hasn't really. They've never fully recovered.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,046
    stodge said:

    <
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Whatever is said on here, you can be certain no one in a senior position in the Labour, Lib Dem or any other non-Conservative Party is taking anything for granted. As you've said, if the voters swing, they can swing back and if he's any sense Starmer will continue doing what he's doing (which is basically what Blair did from 1995-97) which relies on two old adages.

    First, never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake (that's elementary politics)
    Second, don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon. This isn't 1945 when Attlee could transform society - in 2024, Starmer will have to convince millions of disillusioned Conservatives the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left.

    The contract he and the Left have unwittingly and unconsciously agreed is the same one Blair obtained - the Left will shut up or play loyal until the votes are counted and the majority is in the bag. If Starmer only wins by 50, he'll have an awkward squad of his own, if he wins by 200, he won't care.

    He will be able to expend a fair bit of public goodwill undoing the excesses of Kwarteng's libertarianism (the wonderful prospect is the electorate, in their good sense, will have forced BOTH the Labour and Conservative Parties to abandon their own extremisms for a generation) before he can even start re-shaping the country. Now, we can hope (or not) Starmer doesn't get derailed by external events as Blair did - the longer in office the more likely that becomes so the argument is be radical quickly.

    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.
    I would add that objective conditions are not as good as in 1995 and the two-year outlook is worse. Stagnation in the working population and productivity, high commodities prices and the prospect of continuing high interest rates.
  • Legalise weed now.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,044
    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    algarkirk said:

    Matt Goodwin, readable, excellent and wrong on the subject of 'The space for a new party'. His answer: Yes. There is space for a populist, anti-intellectual, anti-liberal, entirely self interested and inward looking party that achieves contradictory aims simultaneously and looks a bit like UKIP.

    Thankfully there isn't.

    https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-space-for-a-new-party-in-britain?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email


    Why do you think there isn't?
    1) History - too many epic fails at this

    2) Mood. Basic truthfulness and honest competence is the demand of the day

    3) The Tories are already in the populist position: Defending a bad Brexit to the hilt; spending tax payers and borrowed money like water; filling prisons; sounding off about migration. People have noticed there is a problem with it.

    Libertarianism isn't what most populists are looking for. That's possibly one of the reasons the Tories are doing so badly in the polls at the moment.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,912
    HYUFD said:

    It was Tory MPs who put Truss in the last 2. Most Tory members wanted Badenoch. They could have put Mordaunt through to face Sunak in the membership vote too instead of Truss

    The problem was the Tory MPs putting Sunak to the members, when it was clear from the start of the contest that they’d vote for anyone except the former Chancellor.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,044

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Bermuda is still a dependency of the UK.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,956
    edited October 7
    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,042
    Selebian said:

    Leon said:

    BANG

    Hmm, let me guess, it is Leon...
    Stands for "big ass nubile girl"?
    From the Tory Conference: Birmingham: Another Night-time Groper.....
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,571
    stodge said:

    <
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Whatever is said on here, you can be certain no one in a senior position in the Labour, Lib Dem or any other non-Conservative Party is taking anything for granted. As you've said, if the voters swing, they can swing back and if he's any sense Starmer will continue doing what he's doing (which is basically what Blair did from 1995-97) which relies on two old adages.

    First, never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake (that's elementary politics)
    Second, don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon. This isn't 1945 when Attlee could transform society - in 2024, Starmer will have to convince millions of disillusioned Conservatives the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left.

    The contract he and the Left have unwittingly and unconsciously agreed is the same one Blair obtained - the Left will shut up or play loyal until the votes are counted and the majority is in the bag. If Starmer only wins by 50, he'll have an awkward squad of his own, if he wins by 200, he won't care.

    He will be able to expend a fair bit of public goodwill undoing the excesses of Kwarteng's libertarianism (the wonderful prospect is the electorate, in their good sense, will have forced BOTH the Labour and Conservative Parties to abandon their own extremisms for a generation) before he can even start re-shaping the country. Now, we can hope (or not) Starmer doesn't get derailed by external events as Blair did - the longer in office the more likely that becomes so the argument is be radical quickly.

    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.
    Oh Stodge! You are living in fantasy land of Tory wipe outs too. A lot can happen in two years. Look at Mike in the header - Tories replace Truss with centre right leader, cabinet and policies and these polls can tighten right up in the year to the election.

    And why is this moment 95-97? Why not 1974-75? In the 1970s Labour were not the disrupters to the failing orthodoxy, and since 79 we have not seen a social market economy of the post war consensus - UK Capitalism of 2020s needs a reset, but I don’t hear it from Labour in fact on PB it’s “don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon”

    In the 70s the right wing liberal-economic disrupters won, and if in 1974 I told you they were going to win, you would have laughed at me. Wouldn’t you?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,571

    Legalise weed now.

    To round off your promotion party?
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,046
    Kwarteng, Sunak and Starmer agree on the same consensus: you can't get elected offering much less than 5% on top of national income, paid for by borrowing. A real Thatcherite budget would have been under heavy fire politically, but wouldn't have turned almost everyone against the government the way this did.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,154

    Welp, just got The Email from my landlord telling me the rent on my shoebox tower block bedroom is going up by 25%. Cheers Liz

    send a letter back telling them their vacancy rate is going up 100% then
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,044

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,571

    Not sure where this idea I hate Moon has come from, I was one of the people most trying to get her back when she was wrongly banned. To much opposition from some here.

    Thank you 😝
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    dixiedean said:

    stodge said:

    <
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Whatever is said on here, you can be certain no one in a senior position in the Labour, Lib Dem or any other non-Conservative Party is taking anything for granted. As you've said, if the voters swing, they can swing back and if he's any sense Starmer will continue doing what he's doing (which is basically what Blair did from 1995-97) which relies on two old adages.

    First, never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake (that's elementary politics)
    Second, don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon. This isn't 1945 when Attlee could transform society - in 2024, Starmer will have to convince millions of disillusioned Conservatives the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left.

    The contract he and the Left have unwittingly and unconsciously agreed is the same one Blair obtained - the Left will shut up or play loyal until the votes are counted and the majority is in the bag. If Starmer only wins by 50, he'll have an awkward squad of his own, if he wins by 200, he won't care.

    He will be able to expend a fair bit of public goodwill undoing the excesses of Kwarteng's libertarianism (the wonderful prospect is the electorate, in their good sense, will have forced BOTH the Labour and Conservative Parties to abandon their own extremisms for a generation) before he can even start re-shaping the country. Now, we can hope (or not) Starmer doesn't get derailed by external events as Blair did - the longer in office the more likely that becomes so the argument is be radical quickly.

    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.
    It hasn't really. They've never fully recovered.
    They no longer exist, they merged with the populist right Canadian Alliance in 2003 to create today's Conservative Party of Canada
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    The Governor General gives that assent though on behalf of the King
  • stodgestodge Posts: 11,000
    dixiedean said:


    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.

    It hasn't really. They've never fully recovered.

    Well, we may see this put to the test as one Pierre Poilievre is the new Conservative leader and he is described as a libertarian and a populist.

    Current polls have put the Conservatives ahead of the Liberals - the latest, by Nanos, on September 30th , has the Conservatives on 33%, the Liberals on 29% and the New Democrats recovering back to 23%. They're still a long way back from the incredible 2011 result under Jack Layton but Jagmeet Singh has stopped the rot and on these numbers the party would win 40-50 seats next time and would likely continue supporting a Liberal minority Government (Justin Trudeau will be 51 on Christmas Day and has led the Liberals for nearly 10 years).

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 24,449
    edited October 7

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    They are nodded through by the Governor General in Canada. Who is a de facto appointee of the government.
    No idea in Bermuda.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited October 7
    Truss government has scrapped offer of free train travel for the military to Remembrance Sunday Services as she continues to put her libertarian principles first.


    https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1578456156778872832?s=20&t=6fj3miEEtMi78xuOzT9k4w
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 42,643

    Legalise weed now.

    You're taking the piss!

    Oh, that type of weed...
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 2,551

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That’s a disgraceful decision . Can you imagine the furore if Truss told Charles to block a UK Bill after parliament had approved that .

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 42,643
    edited October 7
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    The Governor General gives that assent though on behalf of the King
    In his position as King of Canada, NOT King of the UK.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriation
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,529
    edited October 7
    Among the myriad of problems facing Truss's government, I think one is being overlooked far too much, and that is the impact of energy bills. In defending the mini-budget, the government spin machine has gone into overdrive to say: "Look what we've done! We've cut your average energy bills, which could have gone up to an average of £6k, to a mere £2.5k".

    The problem with this line is that a) voters don't buy it, and b) it isn't true. Our energy bills haven't been cut, as we keep being told. They're roughly doubled over the last year. Up, not cut. They are mistaken in thinking that voters will be grateful that their energy bills have 'only' doubled when they could have quadrupled or worse. £2.5k is a huge annual bill for an awful lot of households. (The fact that there's no alternative, and Labour would have done similar, is not relevant). I reckon this is the biggest single factor behind the opinion polls, supplemented now by rising mortgage rates.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,361
    Andy_JS said:

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
    So does alcohol and gambling. And professional rugby. Boxing. Heading a football. Overwork. Social media. Reading Leon’s posts. None of those are banned. Why pick on weed?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited October 7
    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.

    It hasn't really. They've never fully recovered.
    'Well, we may see this put to the test as one Pierre Poilievre is the new Conservative leader and he is described as a libertarian and a populist.

    Current polls have put the Conservatives ahead of the Liberals - the latest, by Nanos, on September 30th , has the Conservatives on 33%, the Liberals on 29% and the New Democrats recovering back to 23%. They're still a long way back from the incredible 2011 result under Jack Layton but Jagmeet Singh has stopped the rot and on these numbers the party would win 40-50 seats next time and would likely continue supporting a Liberal minority Government (Justin Trudeau will be 51 on Christmas Day and has led the Liberals for nearly 10 years).'



    He means the Progressive Conservatives never recovered. Today's Canadian Conservative Party led by Poilievre and which formed the Conservative government of Harper
    from 2006 to 2015 is a product of the merger of the Progressive Conservatives and populist right Canadian Alliance in 2003.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 11,000

    stodge said:


    Whatever is said on here, you can be certain no one in a senior position in the Labour, Lib Dem or any other non-Conservative Party is taking anything for granted. As you've said, if the voters swing, they can swing back and if he's any sense Starmer will continue doing what he's doing (which is basically what Blair did from 1995-97) which relies on two old adages.

    First, never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake (that's elementary politics)
    Second, don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon. This isn't 1945 when Attlee could transform society - in 2024, Starmer will have to convince millions of disillusioned Conservatives the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left.

    The contract he and the Left have unwittingly and unconsciously agreed is the same one Blair obtained - the Left will shut up or play loyal until the votes are counted and the majority is in the bag. If Starmer only wins by 50, he'll have an awkward squad of his own, if he wins by 200, he won't care.

    He will be able to expend a fair bit of public goodwill undoing the excesses of Kwarteng's libertarianism (the wonderful prospect is the electorate, in their good sense, will have forced BOTH the Labour and Conservative Parties to abandon their own extremisms for a generation) before he can even start re-shaping the country. Now, we can hope (or not) Starmer doesn't get derailed by external events as Blair did - the longer in office the more likely that becomes so the argument is be radical quickly.

    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.

    Oh Stodge! You are living in fantasy land of Tory wipe outs too. A lot can happen in two years. Look at Mike in the header - Tories replace Truss with centre right leader, cabinet and policies and these polls can tighten right up in the year to the election.

    And why is this moment 95-97? Why not 1974-75? In the 1970s Labour were not the disrupters to the failing orthodoxy, and since 79 we have not seen a social market economy of the post war consensus - UK Capitalism of 2020s needs a reset, but I don’t hear it from Labour in fact on PB it’s “don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon”

    In the 70s the right wing liberal-economic disrupters won, and if in 1974 I told you they were going to win, you would have laughed at me. Wouldn’t you?
    Without wishing to re-write history for you, that's not how I remember the 1970s. The Heath Government in 1974 was brought down by Union power (largely) but that didn't translate into a strong mandate for Labour who governed with a majority of 3 seats after October 1974.

    Callaghan and, let's be honest, the Lib-Lab Pact were getting on top of inflation in 1977-78 but the Unions wouldn't play ball - even in autumn 1978 it's believed, had Callaghan gone to the country, he might have won.

    The Winter of Discontent saw the Unions overplay their hand disastrously for the last time. Living through that winter convinced millions, if nothing else, Union power had to be curbed. Callaghan and Labour couldn't or wouldn't do it but Thatcher would.

    It's often forgotten her 1979 Manifesto was less radical than Heath's in 1970 but the Conservatives had unfinished business with the TUC.

    Rather like those who refused to accept the 2016 Referendum result, some in the Union movement believed they could run the country and control Government policy but that's not how democracy worked then or now.
  • HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    The Governor General gives that assent though on behalf of the King
    The Governor General does in Bermuda too.

    Who advises the Governor General in both? How come Canada's GG felt it appropriate to approve Royal Assent, but Bermuda's didn't?

    Incidentally from the article it seems like it might not be Liz Truss's Government who blocked it? The Governor of Bermuda says "I have now received an instruction, issued to me on Her Majesty’s behalf, not to Assent to the Bill as drafted." If the decision was taken in the past few days the instruction would have come on His Majesty's behalf.

    Then again, it says the Foreign Secretary made the decision and Truss was the Foreign Secretary before then, so either way she seems to be responsible.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,154
    HYUFD said:

    Truss government has scrapped offer of free train travel for the military to Remembrance Sunday Services as she continues to put her libertarian principles first.


    https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1578456156778872832?s=20&t=6fj3miEEtMi78xuOzT9k4w

    while on the face of it that seems mean , why doesnt the train companies offer it ? Presumably at the moment some complicated system of reimbursement to train operators is in place if Truss is stopping it?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 42,643

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    The Governor General gives that assent though on behalf of the King
    The Governor General does in Bermuda too.

    Who advises the Governor General in both? How come Canada's GG felt it appropriate to approve Royal Assent, but Bermuda's didn't?

    Incidentally from the article it seems like it might not be Liz Truss's Government who blocked it? The Governor of Bermuda says "I have now received an instruction, issued to me on Her Majesty’s behalf, not to Assent to the Bill as drafted." If the decision was taken in the past few days the instruction would have come on His Majesty's behalf.

    Then again, it says the Foreign Secretary made the decision and Truss was the Foreign Secretary before then, so either way she seems to be responsible.
    Bermuda, NOT being sovereign, does NOT have a Governor General, just a plain old Governor.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,571
    stodge said:

    <
    But it also says I get everything wrong, I’m none sure of saying “so true - give that a like” 😆

    It’s also not true my friends Anabob & Horse are giving me a hard time - the truth is anyone posting the Tories are done for so at least 10yrs of Labour is coming I’m determined to give a hard time to. Have these people even followed UK politics for the last 55 years? 🤷‍♀️ as it was said in galaxy quest, don’t they even watch the show?

    UK politics is wild and febrile, because UK has some big issues not getting tackled very well - growth, productivity, post industrial economic transformation, social care and demographic time bomb, energy security, globalisation - arguably New Labour years didn’t help with these, the next Labour government rides a buckaroo-dandy of public opinion if not dealing with them, and can get thrown off pretty damn quick themselves if they don’t deliver. Winning power is no time for hubris, it’s time for sleeves up even harder work.

    Also of course, what is someone’s mentality if it’s all triumphalism and excitement at opinion polls right now? with workers rights, consumer rights, environmental protections and our welfare system in the hands of this government, and bonfire night approaching?

    Whatever is said on here, you can be certain no one in a senior position in the Labour, Lib Dem or any other non-Conservative Party is taking anything for granted. As you've said, if the voters swing, they can swing back and if he's any sense Starmer will continue doing what he's doing (which is basically what Blair did from 1995-97) which relies on two old adages.

    First, never interrupt your opponent when he is making a mistake (that's elementary politics)
    Second, don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon. This isn't 1945 when Attlee could transform society - in 2024, Starmer will have to convince millions of disillusioned Conservatives the Labour Party he leads is a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left.

    The contract he and the Left have unwittingly and unconsciously agreed is the same one Blair obtained - the Left will shut up or play loyal until the votes are counted and the majority is in the bag. If Starmer only wins by 50, he'll have an awkward squad of his own, if he wins by 200, he won't care.

    He will be able to expend a fair bit of public goodwill undoing the excesses of Kwarteng's libertarianism (the wonderful prospect is the electorate, in their good sense, will have forced BOTH the Labour and Conservative Parties to abandon their own extremisms for a generation) before he can even start re-shaping the country. Now, we can hope (or not) Starmer doesn't get derailed by external events as Blair did - the longer in office the more likely that becomes so the argument is be radical quickly.

    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.
    Okay. I’ll play along for a moment. Once you enter this ““don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon” modus operandi, when do you change mode and start preparing the ground to deliver the UKs hotch potch set up of market forces, caps and subsidies the Capitalism reset it needs?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited October 7

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    The Governor General gives that assent though on behalf of the King
    The Governor General does in Bermuda too.

    Who advises the Governor General in both? How come Canada's GG felt it appropriate to approve Royal Assent, but Bermuda's didn't?

    Incidentally from the article it seems like it might not be Liz Truss's Government who blocked it? The Governor of Bermuda says "I have now received an instruction, issued to me on Her Majesty’s behalf, not to Assent to the Bill as drafted." If the decision was taken in the past few days the instruction would have come on His Majesty's behalf.

    Then again, it says the Foreign Secretary made the decision and Truss was the Foreign Secretary before then, so either way she seems to be responsible.
    Canada's Governor General is appointed by the King on the advice of the Canadian government as Canada is an independent state even if a Commonwealth realm.

    Bermuda's Governor is directly appointed by the King on the advice of the UK government as it is a UK overseas territory

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,734

    Among the myriad of problems facing Truss's government, I think one is being overlooked far too much, and that is the impact of energy bills. In defending the mini-budget, the government spin machine has gone into overdrive to say: "Look what we've done! We've cut your average energy bills, which could have gone up to an average of £6k, to a mere £2.5k".

    The problem with this line is that a) voters don't buy it, and b) it isn't true. Our energy bills haven't been cut, as we keep being told. They're roughly doubled over the last year. Up, not cut. They are mistaken in thinking that voters will be grateful that their energy bills have 'only' doubled when they could have quadrupled or worse. £2.5k is a huge annual bill for an awful lot of households. (The fact that there's no alternative, and Labour would have done similar, is not relevant). I reckon this is the biggest single factor behind the opinion polls, supplemented now by rising mortgage rates.

    I was with you until the last sentence but the effect of those increased energy bills and mortgage rates has not yet been fully felt. Sure, people are aware that both are going to go up (although as you say, government spin might make you think energy bills are coming down) but the real driver of the Tories poll slump is Truss coming across badly, the budget favouring the rich, and the run on the pound. IMHO.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    DougSeal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
    So does alcohol and gambling. And professional rugby. Boxing. Heading a football. Overwork. Social media. Reading Leon’s posts. None of those are banned. Why pick on weed?
    They don't cause full on, balls-out psychosis to the extent modern types of cannabis do. Read

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-weed-became-new-oxycontin-marijuana-psychosis-addiction
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,912

    Andy_JS said:

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
    The problems were caused, largely, by ludicrous increases in strength. Which in turn came from the incentives to make weed more compact for smuggling.

    Legalise, and use differential taxation to encourage a move back to more normal strengths. Bit like beer vs spirits….
    In the US, places where the weed is legal require them to give information about strength on the packet, in the same way as alcohol containers give an ABV.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 24,449
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.

    It hasn't really. They've never fully recovered.
    'Well, we may see this put to the test as one Pierre Poilievre is the new Conservative leader and he is described as a libertarian and a populist.

    Current polls have put the Conservatives ahead of the Liberals - the latest, by Nanos, on September 30th , has the Conservatives on 33%, the Liberals on 29% and the New Democrats recovering back to 23%. They're still a long way back from the incredible 2011 result under Jack Layton but Jagmeet Singh has stopped the rot and on these numbers the party would win 40-50 seats next time and would likely continue supporting a Liberal minority Government (Justin Trudeau will be 51 on Christmas Day and has led the Liberals for nearly 10 years).'

    He means the Progressive Conservatives never recovered. Today's Canadian Conservative Party led by Poilievre and which formed the Conservative government of Harper
    from 2006 to 2015 is a product of the merger of the Progressive Conservatives and populist right Canadian Alliance in 2003.

    Yes. And they sit in uneasy alliance. This is a switch back to the libertarian Prairie faction. Which tends to lose votes in the marginal rich East. And pile up ludicrous majorities in Alberta and Saskatchewan.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 8,631
    HYUFD said:

    It was Tory MPs who put Truss in the last 2. Most Tory members wanted Badenoch. They could have put Mordaunt through to face Sunak in the membership vote too instead of Truss

    Yes, MPs chose the two. Not sure what Mike means when he say "Tory MPs are a far better judge of who is best to lead than party members" - their judgement was Sunak or Truss - and Sunak wasn't far ahead (137 Sunak, 113 Truss). And then Mordaunt (105) rowed in behind Truss. If it went to a final tally I would guess that Truss would have topped the MPs choice.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,154
    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    Canada is one of the few places where legally married same sex couples can legally defend their cannabis farm with guns.
    but being very polite about it
  • stodgestodge Posts: 11,000
    HYUFD said:


    He means the Progressive Conservatives never recovered. Today's Canadian Conservative Party led by Poilievre and which formed the Conservative government of Harper
    from 2006 to 2015 is a product of the merger of the Progressive Conservatives and populist right Canadian Alliance in 2003.

    Yes, I follow and that's not to say in extremis a new centre-right or similar political movement couldn't supplant the Conservative Party.

    I don't consider it likely - whether comparable to the 1997/2001 reverses or even worse, the Conservative Party will remain the opposition to Labour in England and that's what's important.

    If you're second, you're in the best position to become first - if you're third or fourth it requires a huge amount of additional work.

    When Labour becomes unpopular in Government (sooner or later), there will need to be an alternative and that is far more likely to be the Conservative Party than the Liberal Democrats.

    The one game changer might be PR but I suspect if he wins a huge majority, Starmer will quietly put it to one side or perhaps bring it in for local elections only (which I'd support).

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,734
    HYUFD said:

    Truss government has scrapped offer of free train travel for the military to Remembrance Sunday Services as she continues to put her libertarian principles first.


    https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1578456156778872832?s=20&t=6fj3miEEtMi78xuOzT9k4w


    One of the cartoonists needs to start adding empty bean cans in place of ears to their caricature of Truss, as she truly is tin-eared.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,361
    IshmaelZ said:

    DougSeal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
    So does alcohol and gambling. And professional rugby. Boxing. Heading a football. Overwork. Social media. Reading Leon’s posts. None of those are banned. Why pick on weed?
    They don't cause full on, balls-out psychosis to the extent modern types of cannabis do. Read

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-weed-became-new-oxycontin-marijuana-psychosis-addiction
    You been reading Leon’s posts lately?

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146

    HYUFD said:

    Truss government has scrapped offer of free train travel for the military to Remembrance Sunday Services as she continues to put her libertarian principles first.


    https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1578456156778872832?s=20&t=6fj3miEEtMi78xuOzT9k4w

    while on the face of it that seems mean , why doesnt the train companies offer it ? Presumably at the moment some complicated system of reimbursement to train operators is in place if Truss is stopping it?
    Truss now trying to lose the military vote tonight it seems as she continues her quest to get the lowest voteshare for a Tory leader ever

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 35,618

    HYUFD said:

    Truss government has scrapped offer of free train travel for the military to Remembrance Sunday Services as she continues to put her libertarian principles first.


    https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1578456156778872832?s=20&t=6fj3miEEtMi78xuOzT9k4w


    One of the cartoonists needs to start adding empty bean cans in place of ears to their caricature of Truss, as she truly is tin-eared.
    I did ask earlier how agent Truss could piss of the 20% still voting Conservative...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 105,146
    edited October 7
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    The one piece of good news I can offer beleaguered Tories, who have basically had the whip hand for the last 15 years or more - is, short of a complete existential wipeout (which I consider highly unlikely), the centre-right will be back. Nature abhors a vacuum and an opposition of some sort will emerge to the Labour hegemony. It should be the Conservatives and if they hold 100 seats or more it will be, at 50-100 seas there will be challenges from the LDs and the SNP. Sub 50 seats and the Conservative Party may need to undergo a transformation much as conservatism in Canada had to. It worked for them in time.

    It hasn't really. They've never fully recovered.
    'Well, we may see this put to the test as one Pierre Poilievre is the new Conservative leader and he is described as a libertarian and a populist.

    Current polls have put the Conservatives ahead of the Liberals - the latest, by Nanos, on September 30th , has the Conservatives on 33%, the Liberals on 29% and the New Democrats recovering back to 23%. They're still a long way back from the incredible 2011 result under Jack Layton but Jagmeet Singh has stopped the rot and on these numbers the party would win 40-50 seats next time and would likely continue supporting a Liberal minority Government (Justin Trudeau will be 51 on Christmas Day and has led the Liberals for nearly 10 years).'

    He means the Progressive Conservatives never recovered. Today's Canadian Conservative Party led by Poilievre and which formed the Conservative government of Harper
    from 2006 to 2015 is a product of the merger of the Progressive Conservatives and populist right Canadian Alliance in 2003.
    'Yes. And they sit in uneasy alliance. This is a switch back to the libertarian Prairie faction. Which tends to lose votes in the marginal rich East. And pile up ludicrous majorities in Alberta and Saskatchewan.'

    True but if Trudeau continues to leak votes to the NDP Poilievre could win most seats on just a third of the vote, although not a majority.

    Albeit the next election not until 2025
  • stodgestodge Posts: 11,000


    Okay. I’ll play along for a moment. Once you enter this ““don't frighten the horses - Labour need to be "boring" to a point - people may want "change" but not too much and not too soon” modus operandi, when do you change mode and start preparing the ground to deliver the UKs hotch potch set up of market forces, caps and subsidies the Capitalism reset it needs?

    Okay - I'll meet you half way.

    Starmer COULD pursue a more radical agenda than seems to be the case and will risk the detestation for Truss and Kwarteng will offset any anxiety (which will be magnified by the Mail and Express) regarding Labour's plans.

    I argued in my previous there's a compelling rationale for acting radical quickly in the first term while you have public goodwill and before external events intervene too strongly. Johnson wasn't even given three months before he faced an unprecedented public health crisis.

    However, there's also a need to prepare the ground - Thatcher did this frequently floating ideas in speeches to see what the reaction would be. Could Starmer or Reeves do this? Yes, but that then begs the cupboard whether they have any radical ideas or whether, as with Blair, the cupboard was bare.

    Truss and Kwarteng have discovered how radical change can go down like a lump of cold sick if delivered in a cack-handed way. Starmer's team will, if they have a scintilla of sense, learn from that and ensure the communication of planned policy is kept as tight as possible.

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,540

    Welp, just got The Email from my landlord telling me the rent on my shoebox tower block bedroom is going up by 25%. Cheers Liz

    I would get some advice as to whether to accept the increase. Though obviously there's a risk that if you challenge it you might get evicted.

    https://www.gov.uk/private-renting/rent-increases
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,154
    Sandpit said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
    The problems were caused, largely, by ludicrous increases in strength. Which in turn came from the incentives to make weed more compact for smuggling.

    Legalise, and use differential taxation to encourage a move back to more normal strengths. Bit like beer vs spirits….
    In the US, places where the weed is legal require them to give information about strength on the packet, in the same way as alcohol containers give an ABV.
    presumably you just have to rip the packet with more force then ?(or give it to a man if a lady)
  • Hello_CloudsHello_Clouds Posts: 97
    edited October 7
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    The Governor General gives that assent though on behalf of the King
    The Governor General does in Bermuda too.

    Who advises the Governor General in both? How come Canada's GG felt it appropriate to approve Royal Assent, but Bermuda's didn't?

    Incidentally from the article it seems like it might not be Liz Truss's Government who blocked it? The Governor of Bermuda says "I have now received an instruction, issued to me on Her Majesty’s behalf, not to Assent to the Bill as drafted." If the decision was taken in the past few days the instruction would have come on His Majesty's behalf.

    Then again, it says the Foreign Secretary made the decision and Truss was the Foreign Secretary before then, so either way she seems to be responsible.
    Canada's Governor General is appointed by the King on the advice of the Canadian government as Canada is an independent state even if a Commonwealth realm.

    Bermuda's Governor is directly appointed by the King on the advice of the UK government as it is a UK overseas territory.
    That is correct, although I am not sure why you refer to appointment and direct appointment.
    The GG of Canada is appointed by the king of Canada, advised by the Canadian government.
    Canada is sovereign and independent.
    The GG of Bermuda is appointed by the king of the UKGBNI, advised by the UKGBNI government.
    Bermuda is a British colony.

    Is this the first time that royal assent has been refused by the British monarch since 1708?

    Doing well, this new duo, aren't they?

  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,154
    IshmaelZ said:

    DougSeal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
    So does alcohol and gambling. And professional rugby. Boxing. Heading a football. Overwork. Social media. Reading Leon’s posts. None of those are banned. Why pick on weed?
    They don't cause full on, balls-out psychosis to the extent modern types of cannabis do. Read

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-weed-became-new-oxycontin-marijuana-psychosis-addiction
    to be fair Leons posts do that as well
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,463
    Stocky said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was Tory MPs who put Truss in the last 2. Most Tory members wanted Badenoch. They could have put Mordaunt through to face Sunak in the membership vote too instead of Truss

    Yes, MPs chose the two. Not sure what Mike means when he say "Tory MPs are a far better judge of who is best to lead than party members" - their judgement was Sunak or Truss - and Sunak wasn't far ahead (137 Sunak, 113 Truss). And then Mordaunt (105) rowed in behind Truss. If it went to a final tally I would guess that Truss would have topped the MPs choice.
    Yes, that seems likely. Truss isn't failing because she didn't have enough MP support behind her, by the time of it being the last two she was a favourite of those who had declared.

    She may well be setting up a betrayal narrative whilst relying on her proven support in the Members vote, like Corbyn. Never fails.
  • Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    Canada is one of the few places where legally married same sex couples can legally defend their cannabis farm with guns.
    Along with Colorado, Alaska, Oregon, Washington DC, California, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Michigan, Vermont, Guam, Virginia, New Mexico and Rhode Island.

    The UK is falling quite backwards on this actually.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,463
    IshmaelZ said:

    DougSeal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Legalise weed now.

    It causes mental illness in many users.
    So does alcohol and gambling. And professional rugby. Boxing. Heading a football. Overwork. Social media. Reading Leon’s posts. None of those are banned. Why pick on weed?
    They don't cause full on, balls-out psychosis to the extent modern types of cannabis do. Read

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-weed-became-new-oxycontin-marijuana-psychosis-addiction
    Regulate, regulate, regulate.
  • nico679 said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That’s a disgraceful decision . Can you imagine the furore if Truss told Charles to block a UK Bill after parliament had approved that .

    Hey Nico! How are you pal
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,463

    Foxy said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    Canada is one of the few places where legally married same sex couples can legally defend their cannabis farm with guns.
    Along with Colorado, Alaska, Oregon, Washington DC, California, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Michigan, Vermont, Guam, Virginia, New Mexico and Rhode Island.

    The UK is falling quite backwards on this actually.
    Reasonable people may disagree on such a thing. I don't think concerns should be brushed aside merely because other places have taken an action. But equally, those most resistent to the idea act like those other places must have done it with no thought or analysis whatsoever, or that it is irrelevant.
  • pingping Posts: 3,201
    edited October 7
    “What the Treasury estimate is saying is that unless you target these tax breaks then you could end up paying huge amounts to subsidise economic activity that is happening anyway”

    https://www.ft.com/content/a3aea4e6-0b29-4783-a024-ad3629a3bc3e

    Of course, the cynical fkers know this, but that’s part of the plan. They then play off the legitimate grievances of existing businesses outside of these zones, to argue for lower business taxes across the board, paid for with deficit financing.

    Reaganomics, without the dollar. We’re barely even a reserve currency any more. An emerging market economy, becoming a submerging economy.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,956
    edited October 7

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Liz Truss has decided to block Bermuda from legalising cannabis by telling the representative of the King to block a bill.

    Doesn't seem a very democratic move to me.

    That's extremely odd.

    Canada's legalisation law presumably got Royal Assent?
    Canada is independent.
    Bermuda is an Overseas Territory.
    Canadian laws still require Royal Assent though.

    Presumably then HMG doesn't get a say in the Royal Assent for Canadian laws, but does for Bermuda's?
    The Governor General gives that assent though on behalf of the King
    The Governor General does in Bermuda too.

    Who advises the Governor General in both? How come Canada's GG felt it appropriate to approve Royal Assent, but Bermuda's didn't?

    Incidentally from the article it seems like it might not be Liz Truss's Government who blocked it? The Governor of Bermuda says "I have now received an instruction, issued to me on Her Majesty’s behalf, not to Assent to the Bill as drafted." If the decision was taken in the past few days the instruction would have come on His Majesty's behalf.

    Then again, it says the Foreign Secretary made the decision and Truss was the Foreign Secretary before then, so either way she seems to be responsible.
    Canada's Governor General is appointed by the King on the advice of the Canadian government as Canada is an independent state even if a Commonwealth realm.

    Bermuda's Governor is directly appointed by the King on the advice of the UK government as it is a UK overseas territory.
    That is correct, although I am not sure why you refer to appointment and direct appointment.
    The GG of Canada is appointed by the king of Canada, advised by the Canadian government.
    The GG of Bermuda is appointed by the king of the UKGBNI, advised by the UKGBNI government.

    Is this the first time that royal assent has been refused by the British monarch since 1708?

    Doing well, this new duo, aren't they?

    According to the Governor, Assent was refused by Her Majesty, not His Majesty, so probably not the new duo.

    But it was refused by the Foreign Secretary under Her Majesty, which would be apart from Her Majesty's final couple of days would be a certain Right Hon. Mary Elizabeth Truss.

    And no not first time, it was refused on the same topic in another overseas territory a couple of years ago. Assent's not been refused in the UK in that time period, it has been refused overseas.
This discussion has been closed.