Privet. I am back from 𝘽𝙀𝙃𝙄𝙉𝘿 𝙀𝙉𝙀𝙈𝙔 𝙇𝙄𝙉𝙀𝙎. Debrief follows.
Moscow seemed the same as ever. Decadent, crime-ridden, expensive, filthy, glamorous. It's the Eurasian maximum city. Mumbai in a blizzard. Less Western stuff and more Chinese tat for sale but it's hard to say how much different that was from the situation before sanctions.
Nobody I met thinks that Russia will lose the SMO for whatever ambiguous definition of 'lose' you care to adopt. It's just question of whether they stop at Kherson, Kiev or Lviv.
I watched Solovyov's tv show. He reckons the plan is a series of rolling mobilisations until they get to 3 million people in the armed forces. Which was reckoned by the coterie of beardie weirdos (it was like the LibDem conference) on the show to be sufficient to prevail against NATO in the existential conflict.
Casualities don't hurt VVP politically and you are kidding yourself if you think it does. On some level, they fucking like it.
There is a modest fraction of the population who are absolutely fanatical about it and are known as the Z-Publik. They have merch and VK/Telegram groups where they breathlessly follow the latest atrocities. The British equivalent would be those fucking arseholes who drive around with Comic Relief noses on R56 Minis 365 days/year.
Saw a fucking amazing road rage incident on the M7 motorway near Nizhny Novgorod involving an axe, a scaffold pole and a fire extinguisher. Some fat chybak tumbled out of a UK registered Audi A4 and started waving a Browning HP (SMO booty?) around which calmed everybody down.
Krasnov pretty much predicted all of this in 'Beyond the Thistle' in 1923. I might re-read it to see how it ends.
Endex.
Honest. I think we underestimate how much the average Russian is up for this (it's why Putin is in power in the first place) and Western media focuses on the liberal Mets and the 20% or so who vehemently oppose it.
It's not representative - anymore than it would be to film a people's march for a second referendum - but it's not a truth we are comfortable hearing.
@Dura_Ace’s vivid account tallies exactly with my experience meeting young rich Russians in Armenia in June
They hated the war, but ultimately, they said: Russia had to prevail, could not lose, and they would reluctantly take up arms for Putin if needs be
If that’s how the sophisticated Muscovites feel…
DuraAce's account is rather depressing but credible.
I am intrigued to know the logistics of getting into and out of Russia these days. I assume it must be a complex process via the Middle East? India?
Thank you to all the kind posts about my son in laws father's suffering which continues with still no ambulance 18 hours after urgently being called to his nursing home and repeated requests
He is 89 and suffering terribly
My son has stayed all night with him and his sister has taken over, though she is facing further distress as her partner is due for an urgent operation for bowel cancer on Thursday in the same hospital her father is due to be taken to
Just noticed the outside temperature has risen from 33 yesterday to 57 today, a huge jump of 24 degrees
I wonder if a Reform UK / BPE type party might get more 2019 Tory transfers than otherwise supposed.
If there's a perception the Conservatives are going to lose anyway, it might be a tempting protest vote for some.
Rishi and Co are going to work hard to try to avoid that.
What strikes me about normally Conservative friends is that they now see the party as embarrassing. They haven't stopped being Tory, but they think the current government is way past its shelf-life.
Will they vote Labour? No, though they aren't alarmed by Starmer. LibDem? Possibly. But just sitting it out seems the most likely for many. That, as I recall, was what happened in 1997. There wasn't a huge "Tories for Blair" movement, just low turnout among traditionally Tory voters. That, for me, is the weakness of the "no overall majority because Starmer isn't charismatic" thesis. Few people see a positive reason to vote Tory, or a terror of Labour to make them vote anyway. A Labour majority on a lowish turnout seems to me the most likely.
And whilst Starmer isn't Blair, neither is Sunak Major. Even in 1997, JM was still a decent soapbox campaigner who attracted a slab of support on a personal level. A good guy unable to lead a bad party.
Fairly or not, Sunak is not seen as a good guy in the same way. If Labour can make the "weak Rishi" jibe stick, what has Sunak got left?
⚠️THERMONUCLEAR BAD—Hospitals completely overwhelmed in China ever since restrictions dropped. Epidemiologist estimate >60% of 🇨🇳 & 10% of Earth’s population likely infected over next 90 days. Deaths likely in the millions—plural. This is just the start—🧵
⚠️THERMONUCLEAR BAD—Hospitals completely overwhelmed in China ever since restrictions dropped. Epidemiologist estimate >60% of 🇨🇳 & 10% of Earth’s population likely infected over next 90 days. Deaths likely in the millions—plural. This is just the start—🧵
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
On topic, its too early to call the next election. On one hand the deck is vastly stacked against the Tories and increasingly so. There is no way out of the economic Trussterfuck, their dogwhistle culture wars against drowning migrants and starving nurses has repulsed even their own loyal supporters, and the Nigel is making a comeback for the voters who are repulsed that the Tories haven't drowned enough migrants.
On the other hand, Keith is interesting as linoleum, the lack of a huge swingback in Scotland makes it hard and the boundary review makes it worse. And there is no way out of the economic Trusssterfuck - blaming the Tories will carry them so far, but they need to offer hope to really win big and thats hard to find.
So too many variables to call it this far out. I think @Heathener is right that the political mood is about as hardened against the Tories and the corrupt incompetence they stand for. But that isn't the same as "therefore Labour win by a Blair". I think the party winning the biggest vote share will be the apathy party. Several million non-voters were persuaded to vote for the first time ever in 2016. And the second time ever in 2019. Most will revert to not voting. Which makes all kinds of seats much harder to read...
Another reframing of the question.
One of Dave's problems in 2010 was the size of the Lib Dem block. They took seats away from Labour but didn't help the Conservatives get nearer a majority.
2024 could well be even harder for Starmer- a moderate Lib Dem revival and bam there are 100 seats out of play for the big two. Getting 326/550 is a tall order. It would mean forcing the Conservatives below about 225 seats, maybe less if the Lib Dems advance a lot. That's not impossible (I think the economy is going to minimise the amount of swingback we get this time, and a lot of the 2019 win was wide but shallow), but it's not easy.
Historically a strong Lib Dem showing has been mainly at the expense of the conservatives but it’s difficult to untangle cause and effect. The worse the Tories do the higher the LD seat count. Much stronger correlation than with LD vote share.
Whereas a strong SNP performance is almost entirely to the detriment of Labour.
Au contraire.
On current polling (and the new boundaries), it’s looking like the SNP will gain all 6 Scottish Tory seats (or gain 5 at the worst). That is a boon for Labour.
Ironically, it's possible that the SNP winning all 6 Scottish Tory seats *could* be to the detriment of the SNP. If it were the difference between a Tory plurality and a Labour plurality in a hung parliament, the former would give them a much stronger degree of control over the balance of power.
But at £45,245 OTR for a base model, I won't be getting one soon. EV prices need to halve before they become very competitive with the cars we plebs drive.
Yes, but that is fairly top of the Kia range as a model, even the base variants of the EV6 are fully loaded with kit.
My 2 1/2 year old Kia e-niro has depreciated about 20% over its 25 000 miles were I to trade it in, about £6 000. That is pretty good compared to historical depreciation. If you can charge at home it is less than half the running costs too. Battery capacity hasn't reduced either over those years.
Mostly though it is much nicer to drive electric. Once used to the smoothness and power, IC powered cars seem very crude.
I ordered my Leaf Acenta (the base spec trim) last December, and it was delivered in July. I paid £21690 for it - this was when the government EV grant was £2500. It's a relatively basic car with a short range by modern EV standards, but it's great for city use, and there's the missus's diesel for long journeys. It's currently still worth more than I bought it for!
I wonder if a Reform UK / BPE type party might get more 2019 Tory transfers than otherwise supposed.
If there's a perception the Conservatives are going to lose anyway, it might be a tempting protest vote for some.
Rishi and Co are going to work hard to try to avoid that.
What strikes me about normally Conservative friends is that they now see the party as embarrassing. They haven't stopped being Tory, but they think the current government is way past its shelf-life.
Will they vote Labour? No, though they aren't alarmed by Starmer. LibDem? Possibly. But just sitting it out seems the most likely for many. That, as I recall, was what happened in 1997. There wasn't a huge "Tories for Blair" movement, just low turnout among traditionally Tory voters. That, for me, is the weakness of the "no overall majority because Starmer isn't charismatic" thesis. Few people see a positive reason to vote Tory, or a terror of Labour to make them vote anyway. A Labour majority on a lowish turnout seems to me the most likely.
And whilst Starmer isn't Blair, neither is Sunak Major. Even in 1997, JM was still a decent soapbox campaigner who attracted a slab of support on a personal level. A good guy unable to lead a bad party.
Fairly or not, Sunak is not seen as a good guy in the same way. If Labour can make the "weak Rishi" jibe stick, what has Sunak got left?
I'd say John Major scored higher on being perceived as decent, but lower on being perceived as competent, or even in line with his voters. The Tories lost a lot of their supporters in the 90s over a) Maastricht itself, and b) their rather high-handed attitude to it. Rishi, for all the discontent over his economic stance, isn't straddling such a fissure in the conservative vote.
Clutching at straws a bit here, mind. 'May not lose as badly as John Major' is not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Fundamentally I agree with Nick. If you're keen on sound money, or on controlling immigration, or on defence spending, or on the war on woke, or on promoting the interests of the private sector, or on expanding grammar schools, or on defending individual liberty, or any one of a dozen traditionally conservative interests, it's hard to look at the Conservative Party and say 'well they're doing all right on that - let's vote them in again'. All they've got is that the other lot might perhaps be worse.
But at £45,245 OTR for a base model, I won't be getting one soon. EV prices need to halve before they become very competitive with the cars we plebs drive.
I will be curious to see what the second hand market is for electric cars. The problem at the moment is that the ones making second hand are the earlier, less efficient models with very limited range. If a proper second hand market is to develop that is going to need to change. And then, of course, there is the batteries. Who is going to pay serious money for a second hand battery, replacement of which may be a significant part of the value of the car?
It is these resale issues rather than the base cost that has made me hesitate to date. I am reasonably confident that the additional base cost can be saved in fuel costs within a reasonable period but will there be a market for my purchase when I want to sell it?
The info I could find (out of interest) is 120000 miles for Tesla, which is not bad compared with many cars and there are examples of Tesla S that have done 400k. Nonetheless I will be changing mine every 3 years. The thing that sells it as a brand for me is not just that it is a really excellent car to drive and acceleration is outstanding, but the charging network which is excellent. I would not buy another EV until I could be sure that the charging network is similar.
But at £45,245 OTR for a base model, I won't be getting one soon. EV prices need to halve before they become very competitive with the cars we plebs drive.
There was a series of good videos by Wendover productions on EVs, concluding they are very nearly at a price range for more mass adoption (for the US at least I imagine), and very nearly at the battery distance range for what people expect and want. The critical issue, it seemed, was speed and availability of charging, not helped by format wars there over adapters.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
With Opinium also having ReformUK on 8% but the Greens on just 5% Sunak has more to squeeze than Starmer too as well as winning back DKs as OGH suggests
I wonder if a Reform UK / BPE type party might get more 2019 Tory transfers than otherwise supposed.
If there's a perception the Conservatives are going to lose anyway, it might be a tempting protest vote for some.
Rishi and Co are going to work hard to try to avoid that.
What strikes me about normally Conservative friends is that they now see the party as embarrassing. They haven't stopped being Tory, but they think the current government is way past its shelf-life.
Will they vote Labour? No, though they aren't alarmed by Starmer. LibDem? Possibly. But just sitting it out seems the most likely for many. That, as I recall, was what happened in 1997. There wasn't a huge "Tories for Blair" movement, just low turnout among traditionally Tory voters. That, for me, is the weakness of the "no overall majority because Starmer isn't charismatic" thesis. Few people see a positive reason to vote Tory, or a terror of Labour to make them vote anyway. A Labour majority on a lowish turnout seems to me the most likely.
And whilst Starmer isn't Blair, neither is Sunak Major. Even in 1997, JM was still a decent soapbox campaigner who attracted a slab of support on a personal level. A good guy unable to lead a bad party.
Fairly or not, Sunak is not seen as a good guy in the same way. If Labour can make the "weak Rishi" jibe stick, what has Sunak got left?
I'd say John Major scored higher on being perceived as decent, but lower on being perceived as competent, or even in line with his voters. The Tories lost a lot of their supporters in the 90s over a) Maastricht itself, and b) their rather high-handed attitude to it. Rishi, for all the discontent over his economic stance, isn't straddling such a fissure in the conservative vote.
Clutching at straws a bit here, mind. 'May not lose as badly as John Major' is not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Fundamentally I agree with Nick. If you're keen on sound money, or on controlling immigration, or on defence spending, or on the war on woke, or on promoting the interests of the private sector, or on expanding grammar schools, or on defending individual liberty, or any one of a dozen traditionally conservative interests, it's hard to look at the Conservative Party and say 'well they're doing all right on that - let's vote them in again'. All they've got is that the other lot might perhaps be worse.
The counterpoint is that Labour has a mountain to climb and the logistics of getting the vote out in enough places are not easy. There are only so many activists to go round, and with Sir Keir being much less inspirational than Blair this could be a factor.
Roughly 50/50 between Lab Maj and NOM seems about right, but the ceiling on Labour is surely much lower than implied by certain Tory hating rampers here, let alone current polling.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Yes but those were economically good times and the then Labour government (which I am happy to admit was quite competent compared to those since 2016) hosed money at the public sector. The basic problem with Labour is that they are fundamentally the public sector party. I cannot see that Starmer (though I personally rate him) will do what is needed to reform various aspects of it.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea...
Something of a counsel of despair. But you're absolutely correct about failure going unpunished.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
Privet. I am back from 𝘽𝙀𝙃𝙄𝙉𝘿 𝙀𝙉𝙀𝙈𝙔 𝙇𝙄𝙉𝙀𝙎. Debrief follows.
Moscow seemed the same as ever. Decadent, crime-ridden, expensive, filthy, glamorous. It's the Eurasian maximum city. Mumbai in a blizzard. Less Western stuff and more Chinese tat for sale but it's hard to say how much different that was from the situation before sanctions.
Nobody I met thinks that Russia will lose the SMO for whatever ambiguous definition of 'lose' you care to adopt. It's just question of whether they stop at Kherson, Kiev or Lviv.
I watched Solovyov's tv show. He reckons the plan is a series of rolling mobilisations until they get to 3 million people in the armed forces. Which was reckoned by the coterie of beardie weirdos (it was like the LibDem conference) on the show to be sufficient to prevail against NATO in the existential conflict.
Casualities don't hurt VVP politically and you are kidding yourself if you think it does. On some level, they fucking like it.
There is a modest fraction of the population who are absolutely fanatical about it and are known as the Z-Publik. They have merch and VK/Telegram groups where they breathlessly follow the latest atrocities. The British equivalent would be those fucking arseholes who drive around with Comic Relief noses on R56 Minis 365 days/year.
Saw a fucking amazing road rage incident on the M7 motorway near Nizhny Novgorod involving an axe, a scaffold pole and a fire extinguisher. Some fat chybak tumbled out of a UK registered Audi A4 and started waving a Browning HP (SMO booty?) around which calmed everybody down.
Krasnov pretty much predicted all of this in 'Beyond the Thistle' in 1923. I might re-read it to see how it ends.
Endex.
Honest. I think we underestimate how much the average Russian is up for this (it's why Putin is in power in the first place) and Western media focuses on the liberal Mets and the 20% or so who vehemently oppose it.
It's not representative - anymore than it would be to film a people's march for a second referendum - but it's not a truth we are comfortable hearing.
Always too worth remembering the Russia has never really had democracy, and has had its regular populace given more flavours of fucking by its elite than probably any other country in Europe*. I've never been, but did learn some Russian in my twenties and love the mad place and its incredible culture and people, despite all the horrible shit that has gone on there. I'm not a teeny tiny bit surprised that the average Russian is broadly in favour of the SMO.
I've got a book somewhere in the loft called Russia 2010, written in the mid 90s and posits a few different potential scenarios for the post-communist state - the most pessimistic pretty accurately describes were the country has ended up.
*yeah.
Russian history seems like a rolling wave of tragedy to me.
It's remarkable that it just continues and people accept it.
The last two times they tried dramatically to change it, didn't end very well.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
I wonder if a Reform UK / BPE type party might get more 2019 Tory transfers than otherwise supposed.
If there's a perception the Conservatives are going to lose anyway, it might be a tempting protest vote for some.
Rishi and Co are going to work hard to try to avoid that.
What strikes me about normally Conservative friends is that they now see the party as embarrassing. They haven't stopped being Tory, but they think the current government is way past its shelf-life.
Will they vote Labour? No, though they aren't alarmed by Starmer. LibDem? Possibly. But just sitting it out seems the most likely for many. That, as I recall, was what happened in 1997. There wasn't a huge "Tories for Blair" movement, just low turnout among traditionally Tory voters. That, for me, is the weakness of the "no overall majority because Starmer isn't charismatic" thesis. Few people see a positive reason to vote Tory, or a terror of Labour to make them vote anyway. A Labour majority on a lowish turnout seems to me the most likely.
And whilst Starmer isn't Blair, neither is Sunak Major. Even in 1997, JM was still a decent soapbox campaigner who attracted a slab of support on a personal level. A good guy unable to lead a bad party.
Fairly or not, Sunak is not seen as a good guy in the same way. If Labour can make the "weak Rishi" jibe stick, what has Sunak got left?
I'd say John Major scored higher on being perceived as decent, but lower on being perceived as competent, or even in line with his voters. The Tories lost a lot of their supporters in the 90s over a) Maastricht itself, and b) their rather high-handed attitude to it. Rishi, for all the discontent over his economic stance, isn't straddling such a fissure in the conservative vote.
Clutching at straws a bit here, mind. 'May not lose as badly as John Major' is not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Fundamentally I agree with Nick. If you're keen on sound money, or on controlling immigration, or on defence spending, or on the war on woke, or on promoting the interests of the private sector, or on expanding grammar schools, or on defending individual liberty, or any one of a dozen traditionally conservative interests, it's hard to look at the Conservative Party and say 'well they're doing all right on that - let's vote them in again'. All they've got is that the other lot might perhaps be worse.
The counterpoint is that Labour has a mountain to climb and the logistics of getting the vote out in enough places are not easy. There are only so many activists to go round, and with Sir Keir being much less inspirational than Blair this could be a factor.
Roughly 50/50 between Lab Maj and NOM seems about right, but the ceiling on Labour is surely much lower than implied by certain Tory hating rampers here, let alone current polling.
One of the things that makes me wary of predicting a Labour majority, let alone a large one, is that I remember how confident I was Cameron would smash Brown to pieces with a big victory. Given Brown's epic unpopularity (a lower share of the vote in the election than Major got in 1997, ffs) this seemed a certainty.
Cameron and Osborne were shrewder than I was. They knew they were a long way behind in many seats, and they had far too many to win for a majority given their small activist base. On top of this, voters were sceptical of their policy offering, partly because it was a bit vague. So they were expecting a hung Parliament and had already put out feelers to the Liberal Democrats about what arrangements they might be interested in. That's why Cameron was so quick off the mark with his coalition offer while Brown stumbled.
I wonder whether Starmer is considering his options in the same way? It's complicated of course by the fact that the third party now are single-issue obsessives.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
ConHome are fucking idiots? I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
The irony is that Gibb has given them exams that are more prescriptive and less rigorous while fooling them - and to be fair, himself - that he's done the opposite.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Yes but those were economically good times and the then Labour government (which I am happy to admit was quite competent compared to those since 2016) hosed money at the public sector. The basic problem with Labour is that they are fundamentally the public sector party. I cannot see that Starmer (though I personally rate him) will do what is needed to reform various aspects of it.
And what do you see the Tories doing to affect the reform you think necessary? We’ve been waiting 12 years for some big ideas. Any insight?
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Yes but those were economically good times and the then Labour government (which I am happy to admit was quite competent compared to those since 2016) hosed money at the public sector. The basic problem with Labour is that they are fundamentally the public sector party. I cannot see that Starmer (though I personally rate him) will do what is needed to reform various aspects of it.
And what do you see the Tories doing to affect the reform you think necessary? We’ve been waiting 12 years for some big ideas. Any insight?
I think the truth is our economy, government and society have all become rather tired and need radical reform from the guts out.
But such reforms in a democratic society are very hard because of the squealing of vested interests (in particular, can you imagine what the Civil Service would say to a meaningful reform of administration which we so desperately need, or political parties to a restructuring of the constitution?) and is impossible in an undemocratic one because it always ends up serving the interests of whoever is in power (cf Venezuela. Russia. China...)
If there were an easy answer, somebody would do it. But there isn't.
I wonder if a Reform UK / BPE type party might get more 2019 Tory transfers than otherwise supposed.
If there's a perception the Conservatives are going to lose anyway, it might be a tempting protest vote for some.
Rishi and Co are going to work hard to try to avoid that.
What strikes me about normally Conservative friends is that they now see the party as embarrassing. They haven't stopped being Tory, but they think the current government is way past its shelf-life.
Will they vote Labour? No, though they aren't alarmed by Starmer. LibDem? Possibly. But just sitting it out seems the most likely for many. That, as I recall, was what happened in 1997. There wasn't a huge "Tories for Blair" movement, just low turnout among traditionally Tory voters. That, for me, is the weakness of the "no overall majority because Starmer isn't charismatic" thesis. Few people see a positive reason to vote Tory, or a terror of Labour to make them vote anyway. A Labour majority on a lowish turnout seems to me the most likely.
And whilst Starmer isn't Blair, neither is Sunak Major. Even in 1997, JM was still a decent soapbox campaigner who attracted a slab of support on a personal level. A good guy unable to lead a bad party.
Fairly or not, Sunak is not seen as a good guy in the same way. If Labour can make the "weak Rishi" jibe stick, what has Sunak got left?
I'd say John Major scored higher on being perceived as decent, but lower on being perceived as competent, or even in line with his voters. The Tories lost a lot of their supporters in the 90s over a) Maastricht itself, and b) their rather high-handed attitude to it. Rishi, for all the discontent over his economic stance, isn't straddling such a fissure in the conservative vote.
Clutching at straws a bit here, mind. 'May not lose as badly as John Major' is not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Fundamentally I agree with Nick. If you're keen on sound money, or on controlling immigration, or on defence spending, or on the war on woke, or on promoting the interests of the private sector, or on expanding grammar schools, or on defending individual liberty, or any one of a dozen traditionally conservative interests, it's hard to look at the Conservative Party and say 'well they're doing all right on that - let's vote them in again'. All they've got is that the other lot might perhaps be worse.
I'll give you competence, certainly compared with his two predecessors. For now, anyway. Even if Sunak solves the strikes, the boats and the Irish question, there are an awful lot of unexploded political bombs about to go off.
Alan Clark had a striking image for the Major years. Early on, he somehow managed to dodge every bullet, like the Superman of the Steve Bell cartoons. A rubbish Superman, but still with a power. Then, one day, the power went, and from that moment every bullet, bomb and whatever hit the target.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
I wonder if a Reform UK / BPE type party might get more 2019 Tory transfers than otherwise supposed.
If there's a perception the Conservatives are going to lose anyway, it might be a tempting protest vote for some.
Rishi and Co are going to work hard to try to avoid that.
What strikes me about normally Conservative friends is that they now see the party as embarrassing. They haven't stopped being Tory, but they think the current government is way past its shelf-life.
Will they vote Labour? No, though they aren't alarmed by Starmer. LibDem? Possibly. But just sitting it out seems the most likely for many. That, as I recall, was what happened in 1997. There wasn't a huge "Tories for Blair" movement, just low turnout among traditionally Tory voters. That, for me, is the weakness of the "no overall majority because Starmer isn't charismatic" thesis. Few people see a positive reason to vote Tory, or a terror of Labour to make them vote anyway. A Labour majority on a lowish turnout seems to me the most likely.
And whilst Starmer isn't Blair, neither is Sunak Major. Even in 1997, JM was still a decent soapbox campaigner who attracted a slab of support on a personal level. A good guy unable to lead a bad party.
Fairly or not, Sunak is not seen as a good guy in the same way. If Labour can make the "weak Rishi" jibe stick, what has Sunak got left?
I'd say John Major scored higher on being perceived as decent, but lower on being perceived as competent, or even in line with his voters. The Tories lost a lot of their supporters in the 90s over a) Maastricht itself, and b) their rather high-handed attitude to it. Rishi, for all the discontent over his economic stance, isn't straddling such a fissure in the conservative vote.
Clutching at straws a bit here, mind. 'May not lose as badly as John Major' is not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Fundamentally I agree with Nick. If you're keen on sound money, or on controlling immigration, or on defence spending, or on the war on woke, or on promoting the interests of the private sector, or on expanding grammar schools, or on defending individual liberty, or any one of a dozen traditionally conservative interests, it's hard to look at the Conservative Party and say 'well they're doing all right on that - let's vote them in again'. All they've got is that the other lot might perhaps be worse.
I'll give you competence, certainly compared with his two predecessors. For now, anyway. Even if Sunak solves the strikes, the boats and the Irish question, there are an awful lot of unexploded political bombs about to go off.
Alan Clark had a striking image for the Major years. Early on, he somehow managed to dodge every bullet, like the Superman of the Steve Bell cartoons. A rubbish Superman, but still with a power. Then, one day, the power went, and from that moment every bullet, bomb and whatever hit the target.
There was a Matt cartoon in about 1995 of a fake newspaper headline: 'Queen falls off horse: PM not to blame.'
It's also true, as May found out, that once you become the target even things that aren't your fault or you've done well over become toxic and you get the blame for them.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
🔥"Rishi Sunak has put the Northern Ireland protocol bill on ice until the new year after private talks with Brussels paved the way for a new deal by February. Senior officials say the bill will not be returned to the Lords this year." ~AA
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The gleaming turd of Brexit.
And now they're just going through their motions...
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The gleaming turd of Brexit.
And now they're just going through their motions...
Laying a Lab majority may be a good trading bet but I still think it's more likely than not that they get a majority. My gut tells me they'll get a decent one, too. I don't bet so feel free to ignore, I'm just a random person offering an opinion on the Internet.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Scant payback coming for the unions if Labour win in 2024. We have never been able to afford their vision of the public sector. Far less chance now though.
Whichever PM and Chancellor try to deliver payback to their paymasters will get the Truss treatment.
Nick Gibb is the reason why a less academically able student who just wants to join their parent’s plumbing business spent last Tuesday morning in a Spanish* lesson and double English Literature… oh, and also why that same kid came out of primary school with poor literacy having sat through endless practice papers trying to grasp grammatical constructs that none of us have ever had to worry about…
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
So, when I tell you that he's achieved the opposite of what he wanted, in such a way that he's done lasting systemic damage to the education system, my views should be ignored because I only happen to be much brighter than him and know much more about the issue at hand than him?
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The gleaming turd of Brexit.
And now they're just going through their motions...
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The gleaming turd of Brexit.
And now they're just going through their motions...
The rest of us want them to piss off.
...before the country goes down the pan.
I can see you're flushed with success after Rehan Ahmed's support!
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
"The last people" ? So you'd completely ignore the views of those with direct experience of delivering healthcare and education ?
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
Nick Gibb is the reason why a less academically able student who just wants to join their parent’s plumbing business spent last Tuesday morning in a Spanish* lesson and double English Literature… oh, and also why that same kid came out of primary school with poor literacy having sat through endless practice papers trying to grasp grammatical constructs that none of us have ever had to worry about…
* insert joke about Spanish practices
They've done something absolutely horrible to how English is taught at school. My daughter is a voracious reader and writes beautifully, yet English was probably her worst subject in all respects.
Mr. Mark, by the markets, perhaps. But Labour are terrible at getting rid of leaders.
For all their flaws, Conservative MPs do deserve some credit (though not enough to eclipse the relevant blame) for axing Truss faster than a PM has ever been toppled before.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
So, when I tell you that he's achieved the opposite of what he wanted, in such a way that he's done lasting systemic damage to the education system, my views should be ignored because I only happen to be much brighter than him and know much more about the issue at hand than him?
Because you're too close and unquestionably have a vested interest.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
"The last people" ? So you'd completely ignore the views of those with direct experience of delivering healthcare and education ?
I'd take them with a large pinch of salt, because they are human and therefore human nature applies.
Laying a Lab majority may be a good trading bet but I still think it's more likely than not that they get a majority. My gut tells me they'll get a decent one, too. I don't bet so feel free to ignore, I'm just a random person offering an opinion on the Internet.
If the public want Party X to have a majority, the hive mind of the electorate is normally pretty good at making that happen. Even if it means flipping lots of seats. Activists aren't that important- see 1997 for an election where Conservatives lost a lot of seats without anyone really doing anything.
But Scotland's decision to withdraw from the red-blue battleground is an issue.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
So, when I tell you that he's achieved the opposite of what he wanted, in such a way that he's done lasting systemic damage to the education system, my views should be ignored because I only happen to be much brighter than him and know much more about the issue at hand than him?
Because you're too close and unquestionably have a vested interest.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
In answer to your first question: no, that's far too nuanced for HYUFD.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
As I said even before the Argentines had invaded the Falklands Thatcher's Tories were back in front in the polls
Nick Gibb is the reason why a less academically able student who just wants to join their parent’s plumbing business spent last Tuesday morning in a Spanish* lesson and double English Literature… oh, and also why that same kid came out of primary school with poor literacy having sat through endless practice papers trying to grasp grammatical constructs that none of us have ever had to worry about…
* insert joke about Spanish practices
And as any primary school teacher will tell you, the insistence of successive Tory education ministers since Gove that reading should be taught exclusively using phonics, has had a catastrophic impact on the learning of those who are dyslexic.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
Bonkers. You are the sort of person who brings consultants with no experience of a topic in to advise experts on how stuff should be done. Having done that job for a major consultancy and been on the other side also I know how useless they are. From my experience businesses only do it when they are too scared to make a decision themselves or can't see the wood for the trees (the latter being a useful use of consultants). Otherwise useless.
The old saying about consultants is true- 'You ask them the time, they borrow your watch, tell you the time and take your watch away with them.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
"The last people" ? So you'd completely ignore the views of those with direct experience of delivering healthcare and education ?
I'd take them with a large pinch of salt, because they are human and therefore human nature applies.
Having been a school governor for eight years, I take your views with an even larger pinch.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
As is Gibb himself. A vested interest it's impossible to dislodge.
Gibb pushed phonics for reading, so 82% reached the expected standard by 2019. 86% of schools now good or outstanding too compared to 69% in 2010 with his emphasis on traditional education
Mr. Boy, has English ever been taught well? I learnt far more about language from French and German than I ever did English.
I don't know if it was taught well but when I did it at school at least I enjoyed it! My daughter really didn't, didn't do as well in it as her other subjects (despite being more naturally gifted at it than I ever was) and dropped it as soon as she could. And this is someone who devours books and can write beautiful and moving prose. If I ever meet Michael Gove I will tell him where to shove his fronted adverbials. This is an area where the government has really fucked things up.
Mr. Boy, I found English bloody tedious (despite reading in my free time, so it's not like I was aghast at the concept of reading books). What did I learn of value?
The main lesson from To Kill A Mockingbird is that dressing as a giant ham makes you impervious to knife attacks, apparently.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
As is Gibb himself. A vested interest it's impossible to dislodge.
Gibb pushed phonics for reading, so 82% reached the expected standard by 2019. 86% of schools now good or outstanding too compared to 69% in 2010 with his emphasis on traditional education
He's a doctrinaire fool. As noted above, phonics has its uses. Its exclusive use has had disastrous consequences for a significant minority of learners.
And "traditional education" did not involve the requirement for massive amounts of useless paperwork.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
As is Gibb himself. A vested interest it's impossible to dislodge.
Gibb pushed phonics for reading, so 82% reached the expected standard by 2019. 86% of schools now good or outstanding too compared to 69% in 2010 with his emphasis on traditional education
He's a doctrinaire fool. As noted above, phonics has its uses. It's exclusive use has had disastrous consequences for a significant minority of learners.
And "traditional education" did not involve the requirement for massive amounts of useless paperwork.
He did what a conservative education minister should do and the results with improved literacy and the UK rising up the PISA rankings show
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
As I said even before the Argentines had invaded the Falklands Thatcher's Tories were back in front in the polls
So as @Benpointer suggested and you have actually now confirmed you really don't understand the difference between 'MAY' and 'WON'T'.
Unbelievable. I never said she wouldn't have won. She may have, she may not have. How do you not get this? How can you create an argument over this?
She may have won anyway. She may not have. I mean that isn't hard is it?
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
"The last people" ? So you'd completely ignore the views of those with direct experience of delivering healthcare and education ?
I'd take them with a large pinch of salt, because they are human and therefore human nature applies.
Having been a school governor for eight years, I take your views with an even larger pinch.
It's basically the revolutionary mantra, now expressed as "move fast and break things".
The catch is that more often than not , you end up with a pile of broken stuff.
And that concern, not to break things whose importance you don't understand, has been an important part of the appeal of the Conservatives forever.
Until some revolutionaries came along and broke it without understanding its importance.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
As is Gibb himself. A vested interest it's impossible to dislodge.
Gibb pushed phonics for reading, so 82% reached the expected standard by 2019. 86% of schools now good or outstanding too compared to 69% in 2010 with his emphasis on traditional education
You do make me laugh… really… do you never read and think through what you write before hitting the post button?
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
As is Gibb himself. A vested interest it's impossible to dislodge.
Gibb pushed phonics for reading, so 82% reached the expected standard by 2019. 86% of schools now good or outstanding too compared to 69% in 2010 with his emphasis on traditional education
He's a doctrinaire fool. As noted above, phonics has its uses. It's exclusive use has had disastrous consequences for a significant minority of learners.
And "traditional education" did not involve the requirement for massive amounts of useless paperwork.
He did what a conservative education minister should do and the results with improved literacy and the UK rising up the PISA rankings show
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
As I said even before the Argentines had invaded the Falklands Thatcher's Tories were back in front in the polls
So as @Benpointer suggested and you have actually now confirmed you really don't understand the difference between 'MAY' and 'WON'T'.
Unbelievable. I never said she wouldn't have won. She may have, she may not have. How do you not get this? How can you create an argument over this?
She may have won anyway. She may not have. I mean that isn't hard is it?
In fairness, that isn't saying anything. In a counterfactual almost anything could have happened.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
As I said even before the Argentines had invaded the Falklands Thatcher's Tories were back in front in the polls
So as @Benpointer suggested and you have actually now confirmed you really don't understand the difference between 'MAY' and 'WON'T'.
Unbelievable. I never said she wouldn't have won. She may have, she may not have. How do you not get this? How can you create an argument over this?
She may have won anyway. She may not have. I mean that isn't hard is it?
You suggested the Falklands war alone was responsible for her victory, that was not the case, for as I showed she was already back in front ahead of the SDP and Labour even before it broke out
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
So, when I tell you that he's achieved the opposite of what he wanted, in such a way that he's done lasting systemic damage to the education system, my views should be ignored because I only happen to be much brighter than him and know much more about the issue at hand than him?
Because you're too close and unquestionably have a vested interest.
Unlike Nick Gibb?
Look, the issue with him - and also with Gove, Spielman, Freedman, Cummings et al isn't malice (except possibly for Cummings). They had lots of interesting ideas that were actually quite well supported at the planning stage.
The problems are that (a) they rushed them through because they believed they were going to lose office after five years and if the reforms hadn't happened Labour might reverse them (b) they ignored any criticism however valid because they thought it was just motivated by malice (as you have) and (c) they relied on the Civil Service to put it through who used the confusion engendered to push their own highly damaging agenda for their own ends (you would be shocked to find how many senior officials on cushy numbers in MATs are ex-civil servants).
Let's stick with (b) as the key problem. Most teachers were in favour of at least considering reforming exams, but there were some serious concerns. One was that the curriculum would be much too heavy. It now takes, in the real world (that place I inhabit and Gibb doesn't) three years to teach GCSE courses he insists must be delivered in two. That also required an enormous amount of work to replan literally every lesson which we were given no time for because of the rush with which it was put through.
The second was the assessment criteria. Unfortunately, too many people involved in the process were not experienced in managing examinations, and those who did have this experience were usually ignored because they were 'too close to the subject.' So we ended up with assessment criteria that were wrong (History GCSE was somehow got backwards so it was easier to get 7 than 4) or so vague as to be meaningless (Music had essentially different adjectives plonked on the front which on inspection were synonyms) or so crammed together that they don't help work out who's done what (Around 60% of all maths grades on the old system are now crammed into grades 1-3).
This means, of course, that to avoid utter calamity as underprepared students sat badly designed exams, the pass marks had to be dropped like a stone. (This is, incidentally, one reason why pass rate under Covid were so high. Because the previous grade boundaries were so out of kilter.) So - rendering all the effort involved pretty much meaningless and leaving the exams as less robust than the old ones.
And it could all have been avoided with a little patience and humility. Gibb has neither. And he's blaming everyone else for what's happened.
Now - do I think that Gibb deserves to be blamed and booted out because 'I'm too close and therefore a vested interest' or because that's an utter shambles that should cost him his job?
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
As is Gibb himself. A vested interest it's impossible to dislodge.
Gibb pushed phonics for reading, so 82% reached the expected standard by 2019. 86% of schools now good or outstanding too compared to 69% in 2010 with his emphasis on traditional education
He's a doctrinaire fool. As noted above, phonics has its uses. It's exclusive use has had disastrous consequences for a significant minority of learners.
And "traditional education" did not involve the requirement for massive amounts of useless paperwork.
He did what a conservative education minister should do and the results with improved literacy and the UK rising up the PISA rankings show
Laying a Lab majority may be a good trading bet but I still think it's more likely than not that they get a majority. My gut tells me they'll get a decent one, too. I don't bet so feel free to ignore, I'm just a random person offering an opinion on the Internet.
If the public want Party X to have a majority, the hive mind of the electorate is normally pretty good at making that happen. Even if it means flipping lots of seats.
Not saying you're wrong but how are you getting to these conclusions about what the "public wants" after each election? Is this coming from some kind of polling data?
Privet. I am back from 𝘽𝙀𝙃𝙄𝙉𝘿 𝙀𝙉𝙀𝙈𝙔 𝙇𝙄𝙉𝙀𝙎. Debrief follows.
Moscow seemed the same as ever. Decadent, crime-ridden, expensive, filthy, glamorous. It's the Eurasian maximum city. Mumbai in a blizzard. Less Western stuff and more Chinese tat for sale but it's hard to say how much different that was from the situation before sanctions.
Nobody I met thinks that Russia will lose the SMO for whatever ambiguous definition of 'lose' you care to adopt. It's just question of whether they stop at Kherson, Kiev or Lviv.
I watched Solovyov's tv show. He reckons the plan is a series of rolling mobilisations until they get to 3 million people in the armed forces. Which was reckoned by the coterie of beardie weirdos (it was like the LibDem conference) on the show to be sufficient to prevail against NATO in the existential conflict.
Casualities don't hurt VVP politically and you are kidding yourself if you think it does. On some level, they fucking like it.
There is a modest fraction of the population who are absolutely fanatical about it and are known as the Z-Publik. They have merch and VK/Telegram groups where they breathlessly follow the latest atrocities. The British equivalent would be those fucking arseholes who drive around with Comic Relief noses on R56 Minis 365 days/year.
Saw a fucking amazing road rage incident on the M7 motorway near Nizhny Novgorod involving an axe, a scaffold pole and a fire extinguisher. Some fat chybak tumbled out of a UK registered Audi A4 and started waving a Browning HP (SMO booty?) around which calmed everybody down.
Krasnov pretty much predicted all of this in 'Beyond the Thistle' in 1923. I might re-read it to see how it ends.
Endex.
Honest. I think we underestimate how much the average Russian is up for this (it's why Putin is in power in the first place) and Western media focuses on the liberal Mets and the 20% or so who vehemently oppose it.
It's not representative - anymore than it would be to film a people's march for a second referendum - but it's not a truth we are comfortable hearing.
Always too worth remembering the Russia has never really had democracy, and has had its regular populace given more flavours of fucking by its elite than probably any other country in Europe*. I've never been, but did learn some Russian in my twenties and love the mad place and its incredible culture and people, despite all the horrible shit that has gone on there. I'm not a teeny tiny bit surprised that the average Russian is broadly in favour of the SMO.
I've got a book somewhere in the loft called Russia 2010, written in the mid 90s and posits a few different potential scenarios for the post-communist state - the most pessimistic pretty accurately describes were the country has ended up.
*yeah.
Russian history seems like a rolling wave of tragedy to me.
It's remarkable that it just continues and people accept it.
It's a testament to the enduring power of state violence and propaganda, and enough bandits at the top to keep it going.
At what point in the demographic journey dies that flip, if ever? When the population is down to 120 million? 100 million? 50 million?
They are compounding an existing fertility decline with a loss of potentially several years worth of fighting age (and fathering age) men being lost to death or simple absence from home. The more mobilised, the starker the effect.
I was wondering the same thing earlier. If we’re really generous about the numbers we get the following: 500k emigrated. 100k KIA. 200k seriously wounded. We’re getting on for a million. But that’s still only 3% ish of fighting age Russian men.
BREAKING: the High Court rules that it IS lawful for the government to send individuals to Rwanda in principle BUT that they must show in each case that they have considered the individual circumstances. They conclude the HS has NOT done that in the 8 cases in front of them 3/ https://twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1604788465870278657
BREAKING: the High Court rules that it IS lawful for the government to send individuals to Rwanda in principle BUT that they must show in each case that they have considered the individual circumstances. They conclude the HS has NOT done that in the 8 cases in front of them 3/ https://twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1604788465870278657
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea...
Something of a counsel of despair. But you're absolutely correct about failure going unpunished.
It is a counsel of realism. What is the reason for hope?
We have been second-rate in far too many areas for too long now. We are becoming third rate in some. And rather than face up to this and do the hard work of improving matters, we tell ourselves vainglorious fables that stop us seeing ourselves clearly.
The biggest fable we tell ourselves is that this is all the Tories' fault and once Labour are in power it will be better. The Tories need to be out of office. They are a disunited rabble and a menace to good governance. But the problems we have are deep seated, long-standing and there is little reason to believe that Labour have any real idea about what to do to address them or the ability to do so when in office.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
As I said even before the Argentines had invaded the Falklands Thatcher's Tories were back in front in the polls
So as @Benpointer suggested and you have actually now confirmed you really don't understand the difference between 'MAY' and 'WON'T'.
Unbelievable. I never said she wouldn't have won. She may have, she may not have. How do you not get this? How can you create an argument over this?
She may have won anyway. She may not have. I mean that isn't hard is it?
In fairness, that isn't saying anything. In a counterfactual almost anything could have happened.
Oh for crying out loud some of you guys can create an argument out of nothing.
It was simple observation on history that events outside of our control can have an impact on our future. I think it is pretty well recorded that the Falklands war and the management of that war by Margaret Thatcher boosted her popularity which meant winning the next election became easier. Subsequently through her skills and personality she became a formidable and important leader in the 20th century.
If the Falklands war hadn't happened the above still may have happened, but it might not have and she may never have had a chance to make her mark on history.
I mean how is that at all controversial?
I do sometimes think you look for an argument for the sake of it.
"Everything that is wrong with the upper ranks of British policing — in particular a culture of failing ever upwards — is evident in the case of the former chief constable under investigation for alleged serious misconduct who has just been handed a new job upholding police standards. "
I have been saying this for years.
What the actual fuck does the Policing Minister do every day?
The current government (though I'm not automatically assuming the next one will be better) is part of the problem, I think. It's not that they're somehow just failing to notice.
It is enraging. Rewards for failure is one of the biggest reasons why so much in this country is now so crap and getting worse.
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
It was one of the more frustrating things about education - seeing people who had been catastrophically awful in one role being moved to another where they were unsurprisingly even worse.
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
I leave it for the educators to comment on Gibb's success or otherwise at the DfE but the start of Atkinson's article hints at the big question: wtf have the Tories actually managed to achieve after 12 years in power?
The educators are the last people I'd trust to judge the performance of an education minister. Similarly, doctors and nurses with a health minister.
So, when I tell you that he's achieved the opposite of what he wanted, in such a way that he's done lasting systemic damage to the education system, my views should be ignored because I only happen to be much brighter than him and know much more about the issue at hand than him?
Because you're too close and unquestionably have a vested interest.
Unlike Nick Gibb?
Look, the issue with him - and also with Gove, Spielman, Freedman, Cummings et al isn't malice (except possibly for Cummings). They had lots of interesting ideas that were actually quite well supported at the planning stage.
The problems are that (a) they rushed them through because they believed they were going to lose office after five years and if the reforms hadn't happened Labour might reverse them (b) they ignored any criticism however valid because they thought it was just motivated by malice (as you have) and (c) they relied on the Civil Service to put it through who used the confusion engendered to push their own highly damaging agenda for their own ends (you would be shocked to find how many senior officials on cushy numbers in MATs are ex-civil servants).
Let's stick with (b) as the key problem. Most teachers were in favour of at least considering reforming exams, but there were some serious concerns. One was that the curriculum would be much too heavy. It now takes, in the real world (that place I inhabit and Gibb doesn't) three years to teach GCSE courses he insists must be delivered in two. That also required an enormous amount of work to replan literally every lesson which we were given no time for because of the rush with which it was put through.
The second was the assessment criteria. Unfortunately, too many people involved in the process were not experienced in managing examinations, and those who did have this experience were usually ignored because they were 'too close to the subject.' So we ended up with assessment criteria that were wrong (History GCSE was somehow got backwards so it was easier to get 7 than 4) or so vague as to be meaningless (Music had essentially different adjectives plonked on the front which on inspection were synonyms) or so crammed together that they don't help work out who's done what (Around 60% of all maths grades on the old system are now crammed into grades 1-3).
This means, of course, that to avoid utter calamity as underprepared students sat badly designed exams, the pass marks had to be dropped like a stone. (This is, incidentally, one reason why pass rate under Covid were so high. Because the previous grade boundaries were so out of kilter.) So - rendering all the effort involved pretty much meaningless and leaving the exams as less robust than the old ones.
And it could all have been avoided with a little patience and humility. Gibb has neither. And he's blaming everyone else for what's happened.
Now - do I think that Gibb deserves to be blamed and booted out because 'I'm too close and therefore a vested interest' or because that's an utter shambles that should cost him his job?
One of the curiosities of the 2010 election was how well the Conservatives did with teachers. Late era Labour did see hideous micromanagement of schools and an assessment system that was almost as corrupt as its detractors claimed.
Gove could have built on that, but he chose not to.
The Trades unions are doing their best to remind people not to vote Labour
Just a gentle reminder that the current wave of industrial action is under a Conservative government. Trouble with the Trades Unions under the last Labour government? Pretty rare.
Trouble with the Trades Unions under the Wilson and Callaghan Labour governments in the late 1960s and 1970s when inflation was higher like now though very frequent.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Thatcher also had a lot of issues with strikes and was only able to muscle through due to a combination of her own perseverence, North Sea Oil revenues and, crucially, the Falklands.
Yep events are critical. If it wasn't for the Falklands Margaret Thatcher may not have won another term and one of the most important PMs of the 20th century may have been a PM that we would just forget.
The Falklands War began in April 1982, by March 1982 however the Conservatives were already back ahead on 35% with Gallup with the SDP on 33% and Labour on 30%.
You do understand the words 'may not have' don't you? It doesn't mean 'won't'. I'm simply pointing out that events outside of our control can have dramatic effects.
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
As I said even before the Argentines had invaded the Falklands Thatcher's Tories were back in front in the polls
So as @Benpointer suggested and you have actually now confirmed you really don't understand the difference between 'MAY' and 'WON'T'.
Unbelievable. I never said she wouldn't have won. She may have, she may not have. How do you not get this? How can you create an argument over this?
She may have won anyway. She may not have. I mean that isn't hard is it?
You suggested the Falklands war alone was responsible for her victory, that was not the case, for as I showed she was already back in front ahead of the SDP and Labour even before it broke out
I said no such thing. I said nothing of the sort. Show me. You really don't understand what the word 'MAY' means do you?
Regarding @ydoethur 's (b), similarly with phonics.
It's a very useful technique for teaching, which was wrongly scorned by some educationalists. But there are other ways if teaching reading, just as valid, and there is a set of children for whom phonics doesn't work at all.
Ignoring that, and mandating its exclusive for teaching reading in primary schools was typical of the manner in which Gibb and successive ministers have run Education.
That also required an enormous amount of work to replan literally every lesson
Yes, buried in there, there it is.
And?
And, that increase in workload has biased you against him.
You could be right in your critiques of him. But nonetheless they are unsafe to rely on.
Driver, those are facts. And they are his responsibility.
It doesn't matter whether I'm biased in favour of him or not. Facts don't change. As Ronald Reagan failed to say, they are stubborn things.
Are you saying - for example - that I am wrong about the assessment criteria? Or about how long it takes the new GCSEs? Or about the pass marks? Merely because I'm angry that he messed up his timetable so I had no time off for two years trying to sort the mess out?
I'm thinking it's you that's too close to the subject. You appear emotionally invested in a failed system that you've been conned into thinking is somehow brilliant because you don't know much about it and you don't want to hear from people who do. Of course, you're not alone in this. Hyufd is much the same, as are many others e.g. ConHome.
Gibb is objectively, a failure who has done appalling damage to millions of children out of mindless arrogance. That's also a fact. If you don't like it, that's your problem.
Anyway, I have to go. Hope I have given you food for thought at least.
That also required an enormous amount of work to replan literally every lesson
Yes, buried in there, there it is.
'Buried' ? It's front and centre as part of the case against Gibb at al that they have created vast amounts of unnecessary work on top of the existing workload. That's a large part of why many teachers are leaving the profession.
But at £45,245 OTR for a base model, I won't be getting one soon. EV prices need to halve before they become very competitive with the cars we plebs drive.
Yes, but that is fairly top of the Kia range as a model, even the base variants of the EV6 are fully loaded with kit.
My 2 1/2 year old Kia e-niro has depreciated about 20% over its 25 000 miles were I to trade it in, about £6 000. That is pretty good compared to historical depreciation. If you can charge at home it is less than half the running costs too. Battery capacity hasn't reduced either over those years.
Mostly though it is much nicer to drive electric. Once used to the smoothness and power, IC powered cars seem very crude.
Comments
I am intrigued to know the logistics of getting into and out of Russia these days. I assume it must be a complex process via the Middle East? India?
He is 89 and suffering terribly
My son has stayed all night with him and his sister has taken over, though she is facing further distress as her partner is due for an urgent operation for bowel cancer on Thursday in the same hospital her father is due to be taken to
Just noticed the outside temperature has risen from 33 yesterday to 57 today, a huge jump of 24 degrees
https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2022/12/is-labour-really-heading-for-a-314-seat-majority
Fairly or not, Sunak is not seen as a good guy in the same way. If Labour can make the "weak Rishi" jibe stick, what has Sunak got left?
It's tempting to think that this will threaten the regime, but perhaps once it's over people will simply want to move on
Starmer's elevation of Watson tells me that Labour will be just as bad.
There is no hope for this country until our leadership cadre - the whole bloody lot of them, no matter what party - is booted out. I wouldn't trust any of them to make me a cup of tea.
And as for getting the truth out of them, well, it'd be easier to nail jelly to a wall frankly.
Clutching at straws a bit here, mind. 'May not lose as badly as John Major' is not necessarily a ringing endorsement. Fundamentally I agree with Nick. If you're keen on sound money, or on controlling immigration, or on defence spending, or on the war on woke, or on promoting the interests of the private sector, or on expanding grammar schools, or on defending individual liberty, or any one of a dozen traditionally conservative interests, it's hard to look at the Conservative Party and say 'well they're doing all right on that - let's vote them in again'. All they've got is that the other lot might perhaps be worse.
https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1604204786957529089?s=20&t=Ye_M-Dzrbb8PGSc0UA_pvg
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=29&LAB=44&LIB=9&Reform=8&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=14.3&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=6.7&SCOTReform=0.6&SCOTGreen=1.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=43.7&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
With Opinium also having ReformUK on 8% but the Greens on just 5% Sunak has more to squeeze than Starmer too as well as winning back DKs as OGH suggests
Roughly 50/50 between Lab Maj and NOM seems about right, but the ceiling on Labour is surely much lower than implied by certain Tory hating rampers here, let alone current polling.
But you're absolutely correct about failure going unpunished.
Fair to say Heath's Tory government also had problems with the unions and strikes and inflation but it was Thatcher who sorted it out and with Major brought down inflation to Blair's benefit. Inflation is back again now though
Edit - I suppose Nick Gibb is an exception to that rule. He's just kept returning to one role and being catastrophically awful in it.
https://conservativehome.com/2022/12/16/gibbs-success-shows-how-the-blob-can-be-beaten/
Cameron and Osborne were shrewder than I was. They knew they were a long way behind in many seats, and they had far too many to win for a majority given their small activist base. On top of this, voters were sceptical of their policy offering, partly because it was a bit vague. So they were expecting a hung Parliament and had already put out feelers to the Liberal Democrats about what arrangements they might be interested in. That's why Cameron was so quick off the mark with his coalition offer while Brown stumbled.
I wonder whether Starmer is considering his options in the same way? It's complicated of course by the fact that the third party now are single-issue obsessives.
The irony is that Gibb has given them exams that are more prescriptive and less rigorous while fooling them - and to be fair, himself - that he's done the opposite.
But such reforms in a democratic society are very hard because of the squealing of vested interests (in particular, can you imagine what the Civil Service would say to a meaningful reform of administration which we so desperately need, or political parties to a restructuring of the constitution?) and is impossible in an undemocratic one because it always ends up serving the interests of whoever is in power (cf Venezuela. Russia. China...)
If there were an easy answer, somebody would do it. But there isn't.
Alan Clark had a striking image for the Major years. Early on, he somehow managed to dodge every bullet, like the Superman of the Steve Bell cartoons. A rubbish Superman, but still with a power. Then, one day, the power went, and from that moment every bullet, bomb and whatever hit the target.
The NIF gain result, how they did it and why power plant capsules will be easier to design
https://nickhawker.com/2022/12/18/the-nif-gain-result-how-they-did-it-and-why-power-plant-capsules-will-be-easier-to-design/
Note they gave yet to publish the full data from the experiment. Once that's out, it will better clarify what's likely to come next.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1983_United_Kingdom_general_election
It's also true, as May found out, that once you become the target even things that aren't your fault or you've done well over become toxic and you get the blame for them.
As is the DoE.
As is Gibb himself. A vested interest it's impossible to dislodge.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1604779771316928513
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/brexit-bill-on-ice-as-hopes-rise-of-eu-deal-9wl67c99r
https://youtu.be/pJ_cNK77lPY
Whichever PM and Chancellor try to deliver payback to their paymasters will get the Truss treatment.
* insert joke about Spanish practices
Take a bow Emi Martinez.
Spoiler: they can.
So you'd completely ignore the views of those with direct experience of delivering healthcare and education ?
Margaret Thatcher is one of the most important PMs of the 20th century. If Argentina had not invaded the Falklands she MAY not (not WON'T) have been PM after the next election in which case she would have just been a footnote. Having had the luck of history she could still have been a footnote, but the fact that she wasn't was then down to her strength and ability (whether you like her or not).
For all their flaws, Conservative MPs do deserve some credit (though not enough to eclipse the relevant blame) for axing Truss faster than a PM has ever been toppled before.
But Scotland's decision to withdraw from the red-blue battleground is an issue.
The old saying about consultants is true- 'You ask them the time, they borrow your watch, tell you the time and take your watch away with them.
If I ever meet Michael Gove I will tell him where to shove his fronted adverbials. This is an area where the government has really fucked things up.
The main lesson from To Kill A Mockingbird is that dressing as a giant ham makes you impervious to knife attacks, apparently.
As noted above, phonics has its uses. Its exclusive use has had disastrous consequences for a significant minority of learners.
And "traditional education" did not involve the requirement for massive amounts of useless paperwork.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50563833
Unbelievable. I never said she wouldn't have won. She may have, she may not have. How do you not get this? How can you create an argument over this?
She may have won anyway. She may not have. I mean that isn't hard is it?
The catch is that more often than not , you end up with a pile of broken stuff.
And that concern, not to break things whose importance you don't understand, has been an important part of the appeal of the Conservatives forever.
Until some revolutionaries came along and broke it without understanding its importance.
Like you.
Look, the issue with him - and also with Gove, Spielman, Freedman, Cummings et al isn't malice (except possibly for Cummings). They had lots of interesting ideas that were actually quite well supported at the planning stage.
The problems are that (a) they rushed them through because they believed they were going to lose office after five years and if the reforms hadn't happened Labour might reverse them (b) they ignored any criticism however valid because they thought it was just motivated by malice (as you have) and (c) they relied on the Civil Service to put it through who used the confusion engendered to push their own highly damaging agenda for their own ends (you would be shocked to find how many senior officials on cushy numbers in MATs are ex-civil servants).
Let's stick with (b) as the key problem. Most teachers were in favour of at least considering reforming exams, but there were some serious concerns. One was that the curriculum would be much too heavy. It now takes, in the real world (that place I inhabit and Gibb doesn't) three years to teach GCSE courses he insists must be delivered in two. That also required an enormous amount of work to replan literally every lesson which we were given no time for because of the rush with which it was put through.
The second was the assessment criteria. Unfortunately, too many people involved in the process were not experienced in managing examinations, and those who did have this experience were usually ignored because they were 'too close to the subject.' So we ended up with assessment criteria that were wrong (History GCSE was somehow got backwards so it was easier to get 7 than 4) or so vague as to be meaningless (Music had essentially different adjectives plonked on the front which on inspection were synonyms) or so crammed together that they don't help work out who's done what (Around 60% of all maths grades on the old system are now crammed into grades 1-3).
This means, of course, that to avoid utter calamity as underprepared students sat badly designed exams, the pass marks had to be dropped like a stone. (This is, incidentally, one reason why pass rate under Covid were so high. Because the previous grade boundaries were so out of kilter.) So - rendering all the effort involved pretty much meaningless and leaving the exams as less robust than the old ones.
And it could all have been avoided with a little patience and humility. Gibb has neither. And he's blaming everyone else for what's happened.
Now - do I think that Gibb deserves to be blamed and booted out because 'I'm too close and therefore a vested interest' or because that's an utter shambles that should cost him his job?
Teaching already required long hours. Are you saying a 30% increase in workload working to a tight and unnecessary deadline is somehow irrelevant?
I also note you are unable to engage with the major issues I have outlined, which are due to Gibb being an incompetent clown.
I ask again - do you think he should be sacked for ruining the exam system while cowardly and stupidly pretending it's not his fault, or not?
Edit - out of interest, what is your job?
https://twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1604788465870278657
But I think it got there a while ago.
We have been second-rate in far too many areas for too long now. We are becoming third rate in some. And rather than face up to this and do the hard work of improving matters, we tell ourselves vainglorious fables that stop us seeing ourselves clearly.
The biggest fable we tell ourselves is that this is all the Tories' fault and once Labour are in power it will be better. The Tories need to be out of office. They are a disunited rabble and a menace to good governance. But the problems we have are deep seated, long-standing and there is little reason to believe that Labour have any real idea about what to do to address them or the ability to do so when in office.
You could be right in your critiques of him. But nonetheless they are unsafe to rely on.
It was simple observation on history that events outside of our control can have an impact on our future. I think it is pretty well recorded that the Falklands war and the management of that war by Margaret Thatcher boosted her popularity which meant winning the next election became easier. Subsequently through her skills and personality she became a formidable and important leader in the 20th century.
If the Falklands war hadn't happened the above still may have happened, but it might not have and she may never have had a chance to make her mark on history.
I mean how is that at all controversial?
I do sometimes think you look for an argument for the sake of it.
Gove could have built on that, but he chose not to.
It's a very useful technique for teaching, which was wrongly scorned by some educationalists.
But there are other ways if teaching reading, just as valid, and there is a set of children for whom phonics doesn't work at all.
Ignoring that, and mandating its exclusive for teaching reading in primary schools was typical of the manner in which Gibb and successive ministers have run Education.
It doesn't matter whether I'm biased in favour of him or not. Facts don't change. As Ronald Reagan failed to say, they are stubborn things.
Are you saying - for example - that I am wrong about the assessment criteria? Or about how long it takes the new GCSEs? Or about the pass marks? Merely because I'm angry that he messed up his timetable so I had no time off for two years trying to sort the mess out?
I'm thinking it's you that's too close to the subject. You appear emotionally invested in a failed system that you've been conned into thinking is somehow brilliant because you don't know much about it and you don't want to hear from people who do. Of course, you're not alone in this. Hyufd is much the same, as are many others e.g. ConHome.
Gibb is objectively, a failure who has done appalling damage to millions of children out of mindless arrogance. That's also a fact. If you don't like it, that's your problem.
Anyway, I have to go. Hope I have given you food for thought at least.
It's front and centre as part of the case against Gibb at al that they have created vast amounts of unnecessary work on top of the
existing workload.
That's a large part of why many teachers are leaving the profession.